The Tribune’s Feb. 7 story on our new “Teacher Professional Development in Chicago–Supporting Effective Practice” unfortunately failed to present a full and clear summary of our research findings and failed to fully inform the public about this important issue facing Chicago Public Schools.
The report addresses three general questions. First, what is effective teacher professional development? Second, to what extent do Chicago teachers experience effective professional development and where is there need for improvement? Third, what sources, means of delivery and organizational supports, particularly at the school level, promote effective professional development?
Using data from 1997 and 1999 citywide teacher surveys, we found that good professional development is positively related to classroom instruction and to school innovation. Particularly important for classroom instruction are the quality and content of professional development. The most effective professional development is sustained, coherently focused and followed up. It addresses student needs, is related to school improvement plans and provides time for teachers to apply new ideas in their classrooms. It also provides teachers opportunities to learn with other teachers.
The report highlights the school system’s recognition of the importance of professional development and cites examples of the system’s initiatives to promote it. We found encouraging evidence that teacher participation in professional development increased between 1997 and 1999, and that the overall quality of professional development in Chicago has improved. Improvement is particularly noteworthy in the system’s lowest-achieving schools, schools on academic probation and small schools.
Looking systemwide, about 25 percent of Chicago’s teachers experience what we call high-quality and another 50 percent experience moderate- or average-quality professional development. Moderate-quality professional development contains some positive elements that make it effective, such as being related to students’ needs, sustained and focused, and collaborative, but may also contain weaknesses in other important elements such as the adequacy of follow-up activities and time for teachers to apply what they learn in their classrooms. About 25 percent of teachers report low- or minimal-quality experiences, and some teachers who need support from strong professional development get less of it. These include high school teachers generally, beginning elementary school teachers and teachers who work in large schools.
Teachers experience higher quality professional development when they draw on a combination of sources, including teacher networks, outside professional organizations and school-based activities. We found more participation and higher quality than average in probation schools and in schools participating in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, particularly at the elementary level.
Still, professional development in Chicago remains largely fragmented and typically pursued by teachers individually.
Finally, we found that effective professional development can be promoted by principal leadership, a school focus on innovation and strength of teachers’ professional working relationships. Our report concludes that future professional development should go beyond increasing teacher participation to improving the quality of teachers’ learning experiences and promoting extended exposure to content related to school instructional improvement. The quality of providers and the means by which they deliver professional development should be carefully assessed.
School-level supports for teacher learning, including adequate time, should also be developed.
