By Amy A. Germuth
EvalWorks LLC

https://doi.org/10.46767/kfp.2016-0025

Introduction

Each year school districts invest financial resources in professional development for their educators. Beyond the cost, educators spend countless hours in workshops, training, webinars, and other learning environments intended to enhance and deepen their knowledge and skills to increase student success. Too often the return on this investment is minimal in learning transfer for educators or measurable academic gains for students and maximum in participant dissatisfaction. Substantial research in effective professional development models exists. When applied to professional development, measurable change in the learning process occurs.

In 2015 WakeEd Partnership and Wake County Public School System (WCPSS), North Carolina’s largest school system, applied that research to the design of an engaging, results-oriented professional development opportunity for elementary and secondary educators – SummerSTEM.  WakeEd Partnership is an education non-profit (501c3) that exists to inform, mobilize and engage the business community in support of strong public schools in Wake County. During its 35-year history, WakeEd has differentiated itself as an organization dedicated to supporting educators through professional development and resources. SummerSTEM is a hands-on professional development experience that addresses the needs of educators — adult learners — and brings real-world lessons to the classroom.

Full Text

PDF

REFERENCES

Banilower, E. (2002). Results of the 2001-2002 study of the impact of the local systemic change initiative on student achievement in science. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Batt, E. G. (2010). Cognitive coaching: A critical phase in professional development to implement sheltered instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (2010), 997-1005.

Black, S. (1998). Money and the art of staff development. Journal of Staff Development, 19 (2), 14-17.

Bush, R.N. (1984). Effective staff development in making schools more effective. Proceedings of three state conferences. San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds), Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences (pp. 209-240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2006). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Darling-Hammond, L., Chung Wei, R., Andree, A., & Richardson, N. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Creating a comprehensive system for evaluating and supporting effective teaching. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.

Darling-Hammond, L., Wei, R.C., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Stanford, CA: National Staff Development Council and the School Redesign Network at Stanford University.

Dunne, F., Nave, B., & Lewis, A. (2000). Critical friends: Teachers helping to improve student learning. Phi Delta Kappa International Research Bulletin (CEDR) (28), 9-12.

French, V.W. (1997). Teachers must be learners, too: Professional development and national teaching standards. NASSP Bulletin, 81 (585), 38-44.

Garet, M.S., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K.S. (2001, Winter). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

Goldberg, M.F. (2002). 15 school questions and discussion: From class size, standards, and school safety to leadership and more. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Scarecrow Education.

Granovetter, M. & Soong, R. (1983). Threshold models of diffusion and collective behavior. Journal of Mathematical Sociology 9 (3), 165-179.

Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7), 495-500.

Hanushek, E.A. (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality (PDF). Economics of Education Review, 30, 466-479.

Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40 (1), 4-10.

Kirkpatrick, D. (1994). Evaluating training programs. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.

Knight, J. (2007). Instructional coaching: A partnership approach to improving instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Knight, J. & Cornett, J. (2009). Studying the impact of instructional coaching. Lawrence, KS: Kansas Coaching Project for the Center on Research on Learning.

Kraft, M.A. & Papay, J.P. (2004). Can professional environments in schools promote teacher development? Explaining heterogeneity in returns to teaching experience. Educational Effectiveness and Policy Analysis 36 (4), 476-500.

Learning Forward. (2011). Standards for professional learning. Learning Forward.

Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S.E., and Wahlstrom, K. L. (2004). Review of research: How leadership influences student learning. University of Minnesota and University of Toronto.

Licklider, B.L. (1997). Breaking ranks: Changing the in-service institution. NASSP Bulletin, 81 (585), 9- 22.

Little, J. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19(3), 325-340.

Louis, K. S., Kruse, S. D., & Associates. (1995). Professionalism and community: Perspectives in reforming urban schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press Inc.

Louis, K. S., & Marks, H. (1998). Does professional community affect the classroom? Teachers’ work and student experience in restructured schools. American Journal of Education, 106 (4), 532-575.

Newman, F. & Wehlage, G. (1997). Successful school restructuring: A report to the public and educators by the Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools. Madison, WI: Document Service, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research.

Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., and Hedges, L.V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? (PDF). Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(3), 237-257.

Pink, Daniel H. (2009) Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. Riverhead Books, New York, New York.

Rice, J.K. (2001). Fiscal implications of new directions in teacher professional development. School Business Affairs, 67 (4), 19-24.

Ronfeldt, M., Farmer, S. O., McQueen, K., & Grissom, J. A. (2015). Teacher collaboration in instructional teams and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 52(3), 475-514.

Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Teachers’ workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.

Roy, P. (2005). A fresh look at follow-up. Retrieved from http://www.nscd.org/library/publications/ results/res2-05roy.cfm.

Showers, B. (1984). Peer coaching: A strategy for facilitating transfer of training. Eugene, OR: Centre for Educational Policy and Management.

Slinger, J. L. (2004). Cognitive coaching: Impact on student and influence on teachers. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65 (7), 2567.

Stephens, D., Morgan, D., Donnelly, A., DeFord, D., Young, J. Seaman, M., et al. (2007). The South Carolina reading Initiative: NCTE’s reading initiative as a statewide staff development project. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Truesdale, W. T. (2003). The implementation of peer coaching on the transferability of staff development to classroom practice in two selected Chicago public elementary schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64 (11), 3923.

Vescio, V., Ross, D., and Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80-91.

Yoon, K. S., Duncan, T., Lee, S. W-Y., Scarloss, B., and Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the evidence on how teacher professional development affects student achievement. Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007–No. 033. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest.