welcome plra members virtual team meeting ......2016/02/10 · lead change. maximize impact....

1

WELCOME PLRA MEMBERS

Virtual Team Meeting

February 10, 2016

PLRA Meeting

Welcome and Goals

• To connect in meaningful and productive ways with fellow PLRA members,

• To gain insight into professional learning strategies used by districts and discuss ideas for embedded evaluation of impact, and

• To introduce the PLRA workgroups as we chart their course (and ours) for 2016.

2

Welcome and Goals of Meeting

PLRA Meeting

Agenda

REL MA PLRA Meeting Agenda, February 10, 2016

Noon – 12:10 pm Welcome, Goals, Agenda

12:10 – 12:20 pm Connections

12:20 – 12:30 pm Learning Forward Take Aways

12:30 – 01:10 pm District PD Strategies

01:10 – 01:20 pm PLRA Workgroups

01:20 – 01:30 pm Reflections & Considerations3

2

PLRA Meeting

Networking

Connections

• Introduce members on call.

• Opportunity for brief introductions for new members and interest in PLRA; relevant background.

4

PLRA Meeting

Agenda








PLRA Meeting

Learning Forward Presentation

Learning Forward 2015 Annual Conference:

Lead change. Maximize impact.

Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center

December 5 – 9, 2015

• MSDE

• NJDOE

• RELMA

6

3

PLRA Meeting

Agenda








Professional Development Systems in Practice: New Jersey District Profiles

Cynthia L. Blitz, Ph.D.

Dessi G. Kirova, M.S.

January 2016

Background

• The NJ Department of Education (NJDOE) has developed a policy

framework to support high-quality professional development (PD) with the

adoption of state standards for PD and a requirement for individual

teacher, school, and district PD plans.

• Together the policy framework and standards articulate a vision of PD that

– Underscores the importance of job-embedded PD that includes

ongoing teacher collaboration.

– Illustrates NJDOE’s commitment to high-quality PD for teachers as

critical to improving their practice and, consequently, student learning.

4

Standards for Professional Learning

Professional learning

that increases educator

effectiveness and

results for all students

...

Learning Communities: …occurs

within learning communities

committed to continuous

improvement, collective

responsibility, and goal alignment.

Leadership:

…. requires skillful leaders who

develop capacity, advocate, and

create support systems for

professional learning.

Resources:

…requires prioritizing,

monitoring, and

coordinating resourcesfor

educator learning.

Data:

…uses a variety of sourcesand

types of student, educator, and

system data to plan, assess, and

evaluate professional learning.

Learning Designs:

…integrates theories,research, and

models of humanlearning to

achieve its intended outcomes.

Implementation:

…applies research on change

and sustains supportfor

implementationof professional

learning for long-termchange.

Outcomes:

…aligns its outcomes with

educator performanceand

student curriculum

standards.

Every Student Success Act (ESSA)

• These standards are very much aligned with the rationale of ESSA which views PL as an integral local strategy for building educator capacity to help students succeed with high academic standards.

• According to ESSA, PD must be sustained, intensive, collaborative, job-embedded, data-driven, and classroom-focused – AND we must prove it is!

• At the same time, it is also important to consider, that under ESSA, the structures, processes, and conditions (e.g., favorable school climate/culture) must be in place at the school/district level to support this type of high-quality PL, so it seems prudent to assess the degree of local districts’ capacity and readiness to engage in the high-quality PL that meet these standards.

Nature and Scope of Technical Assistance

(TA) Project

• NJDOE’s Office of Professional Development (OPD) requested TA in profiling a sample of school districts that are implementing high-quality PD as a core part of their educational reforms.

• The exploratory study was intended to provide OPD with information about:

– Common challenges school districts face concerning the implementation of the state-mandated high-quality PD standards.

– Strategies they employ to overcome these challenges.

• The information learned from this project can inform ongoing efforts by districts, schools, and providers statewide to plan, support, manage, and evaluate high-quality PD.

5

Study Procedure

• NJDOE selected a purposive sample of six (6) school districts of different

size and regions in the state for the purpose of this project.

• At each district, face-to-face interviews were conducted with the

Superintendent and/or Assistant Superintendent, Director of PD and/or

Curriculum, Business Manager, members of the PD committee, and other

relevant parties depending on the structure within each district. In all, 25

individuals were interviewed as part of this project, with each interview

lasting about 60 minutes.

• This project received Rutgers IRB approval and all interviewees read and

signed a consent form to be interviewed and for the interview to be audio-

recorded.

Interview Questions

• Each interviewee was asked to respond to a unique set of semi-

structured interview questions depending on the person’s role in

relation to the planning, implementation, and/or evaluation of PD.

• In general, interview questions inquired about:

– The standards of PD adopted in the district.

– The organizational structure, roles, and resources related to the

planning, implementation, and evaluation of PD in the district.

– Any challenges encountered in the process of meeting PD

standards and strategies employed to address these challenges.

– Any other relevant information or insights that the interviewee

could provide.

PD Standards Used by Districts

• All six districts use some set or a combination of the professional

learning standards to either plan or evaluate PD offerings;

however, these are not prioritized or engaged exclusively by

districts.

– There’s also standards on content and professional

standards for teaching that are taken into account.

– Perhaps one consideration may be to lay-out the different

standards and explain why they are important to consider

and under what circumstances.

6

Professional Learning Provided by Districts

• Districts described using the following strategies (or a combination of

them) to meet the PD/PL needs of the district.

– Common planning time.

– Professional Learning Communities (PLCs).

– Coaching.

– Peer-to-peer support.

• In addition (and per NJ requirements), all districts offer new teacher

induction programs that target novice and substitute teachers.

Common Planning Time

• All participating districts incorporated common planning time in some way.

– Common planning time activities involve teachers from the same grade or content area (e.g., all middle school science teachers).

– A considerable degree of flexibility is built into the use of common planning time, including opportunities for unstructured collaboration as well as carving individual time for lesson planning.

– In some districts, it is built into the schedule every day and in other districts it is not available often enough according to those interviewed.

Professional Learning Communities

• Five of the six districts have established some form of teacher PLCs.

– PLCs reportedly have an established meeting schedule ranging from once a week, to once a month, to every other month with about 40 minutes dedicated to each meeting.

– Three of the districts reported having facilitated PLCs with agendas set prior to the meetings.

– One district has teacher leaders facilitating PLCs and are meeting as a facilitated PLC themselves.

– Four districts reported some form of PLC training to staff, most typically in the form of public presentation.

7

Coaching

• Five of the six districts reported having some type of coaching practice to support PD.

– These five districts reported having either an instructional coach or a staff developer position responsible for coaching teachers, and one district reported also having administrators act as coaches as part of the teacher evaluation process.

– In one of the districts, instructional coaches were responsible for facilitating PLCs and supporting teachers by monitoring student growth.

– There is a common belief that coaching is effective because it provides support that is ongoing, embedded, relevant, and specific.

Peer-to-Peer Support

• All districts reported having implemented some type of peer-to-peer

professional learning, e.g., peer coaching, peer visitation and observation,

and cross-district peer visitation.

– In all districts, the goal of peer-to-peer support is to share best practices

(e.g., classroom management, effective instruction, and lesson plans).

– Some sharing and exchange is done within a school and some across

schools in the district; however, almost in all cases this involves

classroom observations.

– In two of the districts, teachers are also encouraged to follow up on the

initial observation or interaction by providing feedback to peers,

participating in a discussion and/or debriefing about effective teaching

strategies with their colleagues.

Key Challenges: Funding

• In response to funding challenges:

– All districts have turned, at least in part, to the provision of in-house PD

through train-the-trainer models, use of internal expertise, and use of

technology to manage and share information.

– Three of the districts expanded PD through targeted use of social media

(e.g., Twitter and Facebook to share resources and network).

– Two of the districts have been seeking external grant funding to support

PD, mostly from NJDOE.

– Three districts reported using some form of re-distribution, re-allocation,

and re-consideration of existing resources (for example, tasking an

assistant superintendent with predominantly PD-related responsibilities).

8

Key Challenges: Time

• Districts report various ways in which they were able to respond to time

constraints:

– Four districts reported paying stipends to teachers for out-of-school

hours to either attend PD or develop PD workshops.

– One district reported establishing PLCs as a means to provide

teachers with additional collaborative professional learning through

release time and having subs covering for them.

– One district reported having teachers take state-mandated online

PD on their own time.

Key Challenges: Meeting State Mandates

• Districts reported various ways in which they were able to respond to

this challenge:

– Five districts reported using some type of technology (online

tutorials, webinars, use of Global Compliance Network, and

YouTube channels) to assist and support teachers in completing

state-mandated PD requirements.

– Districts reported having teachers complete state-mandated PD

requirements on their own time or using dedicated PD days.

– One district reported establishing PLCs to support teachers in

completing the state-mandated PD requirements.

Key Challenges: Teacher Buy-In

• Districts reported addressing this issue in three ways:

– The majority of districts used some type of incentive to motivate teacher

involvement in PD including stipends for out of school PD, time off,

factoring participation into teacher evaluation, and earning awards and

recognition.

– Respondents from three districts reported working on building trust among

staff by engaging them in a bottom-up or participatory process of providing

PD, creating informal opportunities to meet and exchange views (e.g.,

“Coffee with admin”), and fostering a culture of growth by means of

coaching.

– One district reported using accountability measures to address resistance

to change.

9

Summary of Major Findings

• All six participating districts are already engaged in a conscious effort to provide high-quality PD that meets the state mandates. They achieve this through a combination of PD models (common planning time, PLCs, coaching/mentoring, and peer-to-peer modeling) and by instituting new teacher induction programs.

• All six districts report a similar set of key challenges for providing high-quality PD: limited funding, time constraints, need to balance PD needed to meet state mandates with PD that is responsive to staff needs, and gaining buy-in from teachers. A few districts are also challenged by the need to differentiate PD by staff expertise, lack of capacity to use data effectively to inform instruction, and lack of support from the school board.

Similarities in How Districts Respond to Key

Challenges

• All districts profiled have turned to provision of PD in-house. Some have

created new or restructured existing positions, including “train-the-trainer”

models. Others employ less formal or systematic strategies, such as relying

on specific individuals with expertise to mentor or coach others.

• There is an increasing reliance on technology (Internet and social media) to

engage teachers with the types of PD mandated by the state as well as for

sharing best practices. In some districts, teachers are expected to engage

with such tools on their own and outside of school time.

• The participating districts have not necessarily been engaged in a systematic

effort to evaluate the efficacy of these strategies beyond assessing staff

satisfaction; however, individuals interviewed felt confident that their district

does well on the PD front.

Differences in How Districts Respond to Key

Challenges

• The one difference that was apparent in how districts organize and the

strategies they employ to meet this set of common challenges was with

their use of collaborative and/or PLC time:

– Although in all six participating districts collaborative learning is

viewed as a useful strategy to meeting key challenges, some

districts leave it to teachers to collaborate informally, while others

make provisions (e.g., facilitators or structured guidance as well as

built in time) to enable such collaborative learning.

10

Discussion

• What are your thoughts regarding the findings?

• Does your experience with provision of high-quality PD

similar or different from what was described?

• What is the best way of using the findings of this study

to move forward?

PLRA Meeting

ESSA and PLRA Work

• The connection and question:

‒ According to ESSA, PD must be sustained, intensive, collaborative, job-embedded, data-driven, and classroom-focused.

‒ To be most useful, the evaluation of PD efforts taken by districts and schools must meet the same standards.

‒ How do we better integrate evaluation with every aspect of providing high-quality PD?

29

PLRA Meeting

Evidence and Evaluation of PD

• What do we need? ‒ A clear articulation of high-quality PD in relation to

actual needs (needs assessment).

‒ A clear articulation of how PD program and activities are expected to meet needs (logic models).

‒ A clear articulation of benchmarks for tracking progress (measures).

‒ A clear articulation of a process for collecting and analyzing the most relevant, timely, and cost-effective data.

‒ A clear articulation of how to best use and communicate evaluation findings.

30

11

PLRA Meeting

Agenda








PLRA Meeting

Upcoming PLRA Work

• PLRA Technology Work Group; PLRA-TWG (resource-building; using tech/social media for communication - and for PD?).

‒ Cuddihy, deGuzman, Heinrich, Kastner, Laugelli, McConnell; Robinson Cohen, Volkman, Vuckovich.

• PLRA Dissemination Work Group; PLRA-DWG (presentations/pubs)

‒ Alvich, Brinkley, Cuddihy, deGuzman, Fatovic, Heinrich, Kastner, Laugelli, Pine, Robinson Cohen, Scarton, Vuckovich.

• PLRA Dissemination Work Group - Evaluation & Data; PLRA-DWG-ED

‒ Brinkley, deGuzman, Heinrich, Kastner, Kozak.

• PLRA In-Person Meeting Planning Work Group; PLRA-IMP-WG

32

PLRA Work Groups

PLRA Meeting

Upcoming PLRA Work

• Members willing to help with notes from past meetings

‒ Kastner & Blitz with Brinkley, deGuzman, Heinrich, Laugelli, McConnell, and Vuckovich.

• Interest in including additional teachers as part of membership – ideas?

• Members willing to be featured in a RELMA newsletter to highlight work of PLRA & their related work in district/state

‒ Cuddihy, deGuzman, Heinrich, Kastner, Volkman, Mitchell, Vuckovich.

33

Additional PLRA Work

12

PLRA Meeting

Agenda





12:30 – 01:10 pm District PD Models/Evaluation



PLRA Meeting

Reflections and Considerations

• Upcoming Meeting Topics Based on Survey Results

‒ Alternative models of collaboration to PLCs for teachers & administrators (virtual, hybrid, and in-person).

‒ Alternative models of PLCs addressing focus, make up, and scheduling (including virtual, hybrid, and inperson).

‒ Evidence/data supporting PD/PL strategies' impact on teachers and then student learning; Embedded eval.

‒ Inventory and measurement of current initiatives –Hexagon model, others?

‒ Use of social media for communication?; for professional development? 35

PLRA Meeting

Reflections and Considerations

• Upcoming Meeting Topics/Work Based on Survey Results

‒ Review of all past PLRA meetings – brief overview, resources shared that remain useful to consider and take aways.

‒ Professional conversations that move learning forward.

‒ Online cross-state or cross-region networks/alliances –what exists out there? (is there a void that we might be able to fill?).

36

13

PLRA Meeting

Action Items

• We will try to schedule our PLRA in-person meeting in July or August in Philadelphia.

• Doodle poll will be sent to schedule April/May Virtual Meeting as well as one for July/August In-Person Meeting.

• The cross-RA meeting (in-person) will likely be in September or October 2016.

• We will reach out about scheduling brief virtual work sessions for the work groups.

• Meeting notes from today’s meeting will be shared in our google drive folder (as well as through email).

37

PLRA Meeting

Final Connections and Farewells

Please feel free to follow up with comments and suggestions:

Cindy Blitz

Research Alliance Task Lead and Professional Learning Research Alliance Coordinator

[email protected]

(732) 564-9100, X21

(215) 837-8249

38

mailto:[email protected]

welcome plra members virtual team meeting ......2016/02/10 · lead change. maximize impact....

Documents