You need to learn more about professional development.
I have finally consumed every word of this massive Education Week package on professional development, most of it by Stephen Sawchuk, along with Bess Keller and Mary Ann Zehr (and others I have probably missed). Thank goodness for it. The topic is all but ignored in the policy conversation and journalism, yet so important, as PD swallows so much money and time.
“Swallow” has a negative tinge to it, which might not be fair. Except that it too often is. There are many people out there in the policy world who think professional development is a waste of time and money, because mediocre teachers cannot be improved. That’s an awfully cynical view, and even if you don’t share it you know that teachers have to waste a lot of time in training that is not well thought-out or implemented. This set of articles sheds some light on the bad vs. good—there is good out there; I liked this piece on Lexington, Mass.—and most of all, the inability to even determine which is which.
My favorite quote in the project: “There’s probably not a district out there that doesn’t think it’s doing PLCs,” one superintendent said. YES. And there’s probably not a journalist out there that hasn’t written about a district adopting PLCs. But writing clearly about what that means and doesn’t mean in reality? We need more of that, to say the least.
Warning: Education Week is not good about getting articles in front of the paywall, so you might not be able to read all of this. Then again, if you are really interested in education, you should be subscribing to EdWeek anyway.
“Swallow” has a negative tinge to it, which might not be fair. Except that it too often is. There are many people out there in the policy world who think professional development is a waste of time and money, because mediocre teachers cannot be improved. That’s an awfully cynical view, and even if you don’t share it you know that teachers have to waste a lot of time in training that is not well thought-out or implemented. This set of articles sheds some light on the bad vs. good—there is good out there; I liked this piece on Lexington, Mass.—and most of all, the inability to even determine which is which.
My favorite quote in the project: “There’s probably not a district out there that doesn’t think it’s doing PLCs,” one superintendent said. YES. And there’s probably not a journalist out there that hasn’t written about a district adopting PLCs. But writing clearly about what that means and doesn’t mean in reality? We need more of that, to say the least.
Warning: Education Week is not good about getting articles in front of the paywall, so you might not be able to read all of this. Then again, if you are really interested in education, you should be subscribing to EdWeek anyway.
posted by Linda Perlstein at
3:52 PM
1 Comments:
The key passage in the Lexington article is
"Administrators and even teachers here like to refer to the teaching corps as composed of "thoroughbreds"—confident, trained practitioners who excel in their content areas but also happen to be a bit stubborn."
Remember that is an already high-performing school. In the inner city, I have ALWAYS seen the same pattern. The PLC rules say "no mission drift" meaning no discussion about discipline. But teachers won't discuss the PLC academic issues until we get a response on discipline.
AND THAT IS HOW WE TEACHERS SHOULD RESPOND. None of this PLC will make a difference without addressing discipine. If we have confidence, we should not do more than go through the motions of complying until discipline is addressed.
I don't know the individual who made the closing comment about teachers not needing to be in the system if they can't fit in. But in urban districts, I don't know why we need administrators who don't know squat about the inner city. They may think they are doing PLC but that's impossible, at least in secondary schools, until they show us the respect of addressing the #1 issue which is the lack of disciplinary backing.
Post a Comment
Considerate comments are welcome. Uncivil remarks will be deleted. Anonymous comments -- including those unaccompanied by the author's first and last name -- are not permitted.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home