Conduct needs assessments to inform the content and delivery of technology-related professional learning programs that result in a positive impact on student learning (ISTE 2011).
The first step in the professional development virtuous cycle is needs assessment. That is, what exactly is required at a particular learning institution to move the state of professional development forward? The needs for a particular institution depend on the results and feedback from previous professional development program. It also depends on the input and experience of two distinct groups – leaders/administrators and educators/teachers.
We typically think first of the impact of the ever-changing education technology on teachers. However, there is also a large impact of this same technology on education leaders and administrators. The leadership and infrastructure sections of the National Education Technology plan identify the requirements for leaders and administrators to meet this challenge.
Moving to learning enabled by technology can mean a shift in the specific skills and competencies required of leaders. Education leaders need personal experience with learning technologies, an understanding of how to deploy these resources effectively, and a community-wide vision for how technology can improve learning. (NETP, 2017)
The other group that has a role in the needs assessment process is the individual educator. This is a vital part of making professional development better at any education institution. Educators must provide feedback into the system about what worked and what needs to change in order to make forward progress. Without this input, it is not clear if professional development is addressing the actual needs of educators or whether changes are making things any better. In their article on Transforming professional learning in Washington State, Bishop et. al. describe the importance of ‘teacher voice’.
Teacher voice was very present in determining the direction of professional learning. This increase in teacher voice was characterized as “agency”. Teachers regularly saw themselves as being responsible for their own professional learning. (Bishop et. al., 2016)
I have been guilty of commiserating with my fellow faculty about the shortcomings of existing professional development. However, with a better understanding of the virtuous cycle embodied by the ISTE professional development and program evaluation standard, I realize that a lot of these conversations represent opportunities. It is the educator’s job to communicate these professional development shortcomings to education leaders and administrators during the needs assessment cycle so that the next iteration will not suffer the same shortcomings.
References
- Bishop, D, Lumpe, A., Henrikson, R, & Crane, C. (2016). Transforming Professional Learning in Washington State – Project Evaluation Report. Seattle Pacific University: Seattle, WA. Chap. 3.
- International Society for Technology in Education. (ISTE; 2011). Standards for Coaches. https://id.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20-14_ISTE_Standards-C_PDF.pdf.
- NETP. (2017). National Education Technology Plan. Leadership and Infrastructure sections. Retrieved January 24, 2020 from https://tech.ed.gov/netp/infrastructure/
<< Previous: 4. Prof. Development and Prog. Evaluation Next: 4B >>