PDandPI
From LiteracyTentWiki
From: meyer_j at ccsdistrict.org
Subject: [AAACE-NLA] Towards Quality Outcomes in Adult Literacy Programs
Date: Wed Dec 29 11:07:10 EST 2004
- What are some program-based professional development delivery models you've seen or used that have proven effective for you?
- When is on-site professional development most effective? (under what conditions)
The best professional delivery model I have used in our Canton, Ohio ABLE program was ongoing over a period of 9 months. It was a training on evidence-based reading research, but the topic doesn't matter. What made it work was 1. it was ongoing support, 2. teachers gave continuous feedback as they tried out new ideas, and 3. teachers were given resources. Working with a group of about 15 teachers we did an initial 2 day training to give an overview of EBRR. We then met monthly for 2 hours (for 8 months) for additional training. Teachers were each given an extra 2 hours paid time a week to read and reflect on what they had done. They wrote in a journal to me and I wrote back to them. I used what they wrote in their journals to plan the next session. I could see where they were having success and ask them to share and I could see where they were struggling. I also coached them in my replies. Having to write something weekly (and being paid to do so) pushed teachers to take the plunge to try the ideas. Each month I also gave each teacher a resource book on the topic we were studying (such as vocabulary or comprehension). I chose books that were teacher friendly, and full of teaching strategies that they could use. Because they had their own book to take home they used it more than the books we have in out staff library. I also gave each teacher $250 to spend on reading materials for their classroom so when we showed strategies with pocket charts or mini white boards, etc. they could purchase what would be appropriate for their group. This was by far the most effective professional development our staff ever participated in. Jane Meyer Canton City Schools ABLE Canton, Ohio meyer_j at ccsdistrict.org
From: <hwrigley@aiweb.com>
Subject: [AAACE-NLA] fostering quality - what does it take? (long but easy)
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:18:17 -0800
Hi, David and others
How intriguing that we are able to adapt a model from industry and make it work for our own purposes to engage in "continuous improvement." I'm familiar with a couple of companies who have won Baldridge awards (i.e. I have done work with them and/or am friends with some of their HRD staff) and it's been a bit sobering to see that when profits start to dwindle that the process people are the first to go. So there may be much more hope for non-profit organizations such as educational agencies to fully commit to the process for the long term and I look forward to hearing more.
My own experience in working with programs through research and demonstration projects and in visiting programs, supports a process model that works toward a common goal. Through my work on various fronts I found the following to be true.
1. "Good programs" (using the "You know it when you see it" criterion for a moment) tend to " a culture of learning" in place where all staff is involved in struggling with ways to make the program work for all of the students and grapple with the hard issues such as how to engage students who have difficulty when most other students don't.
2. Since collaboration doesn't just magically happen (and there are many forces acting against it), the better programs tend to have an administrator who acts as a "guiding light" for the program. That is, she (sometimes he) sets the tone that says - "we are going to make this the best damn program that we can and I need your help". They set high expectations and provide high support but also provide leadership that is grounded in issues that relate to student success (not just outcomes). These administrators are often able to provide funds or incentives for groups of teachers to work together (to update/upgrade the curriculum; to develop a technology plan, or to design an assessment framework that is linked to capturing what really counts in teaching and learning.
3. The successful administrators I've know (again using my own criteria which I could operationalize but not at the moment) set a tone that invites teachers to participate but also suggest that teachers need to be part of the process for the students' sake and they find moneys (e.g., leadership monies)that allow them to access the kind of training that supports the direction that the program has chosen (this is a process that is always in flux, by the way). They provide new or struggling teachers with the help they need to set up learning opportunities that work for all students (through mentoring for example) but also hold their feet to the fire so to speak rather than just ignoring teachers who for whatever reason have chosen to do full frontal teaching and don't notice when students are confused, bored or overwhelmed.
4. They make sure that teachers don't go stale by offering new ideas, new content and new tools and then pay attention to what it takes to implement models that show promise successfully. They don't give up too soon but struggle right along with teachers and students.
5. They do their best to bring learners into the process, both on a program wide basis and through various ways that support teachers getting to know their students as people (including but not limited to their interests, goals, needs).
6. They advocate for their teachers and students and for what they know to be good practice while keeping an open mind. They help staff and students do the same. And they certainly know the difference between lobbying and advocacy and are silent when it's better to keep one's mouth shut
7. They focus on those processes that are likely to result in meaningful learning but also work with teachers and learners to define what those might look like, how to get there, and who to capture when what you want to happen is is and is not happening (and what to do about it)
8. They reward success .. by sending engaged teachers to conferences for example, helping the write proposals and letting them shine
One thing they don't do, is to "outsource" staff development to the extent that they hope that by sending their teachers to workshops and conferences, a miracle will happen and all their quality related problems will be solved.
Do programs who keep their eye on the prize (meaningful participation, engaged learning, thoughtful teaching) have higher test scores? Sometimes yes and sometimes no - depending on all the other variables that play into the process. But they most certainly are able to show scores that match up nicely with those of other programs.
And, in my mind, at least, these type of administrators working in collaboration with teachers and students certainly increase the likelihood that students will come away with greater knowledge, better skills, and a larger repertoire of strategies for negotiating not only language and literacy demands but life in general. And while this may not be enough, given current expectations, it is certainly better than teaching solely (or largely) to a basic skills test.
Whew - sorry about the length of my postings once more but I seem to have these spurts of time and energy on those endless cross-country flights.
I would love to hear to what extend this does or does not match the experience of others
Cheers
Heide Wrigley
P.S. Jackie, Janet I., David and others who may be signed up for the electronic conference through Literacy, B.C., (which is continuing by popular demand), we are having a parallel conversation over there albeit slightly less philosophical than the talk on this list. This is not to discourage anyone, of course, and I'll be happy to cross-post if I can figure out how.
Heide Spruck Wrigley
LiteracyWork International
Mesilla, N.M.
