We often discuss differentiated or individualized instruction being important for students and then provide “one-size-fits-all” professional development for educators – the entire range from K-12. At one point in a previous article, I wrote “What I have never understood is that as educators. Supervisors and administrators we are knowledgeable of the need for Individualized Education Plans for students who need them, differentiated instruction in order to help students thrive based on their learning preferences, and if necessary accelerated or remedial instruction for those students who learn at a different pace. However, when it comes to professional development for educators, district personnel forget all of the important lessons we employ for students and often adopt a once size fits all approach to professional development.”  My views are still along the same lines, but since have come to better understand the many of the limitations that impact professional development opportunities such as an educator’s time, fiscal support, and district needs.

There is no doubt that professional development requirements vary from district to district and often state to state. Individual states may have requirements for moving from one level certificate to another, maintaining your certificate or simply an hour requirement in a given amount of time. Another requirement that is often part of a teacher’s yearly plan are required in-service days organized and sponsored by the school district which may or may not apply to state certificate programs.

It is important to keep this in mind when we consider a study from the Center for Teaching Quality mentioned in the recent issue of the Leaders Letter investigated professional development options across seven international classrooms and published a report titled “A Global Network of Teachers and Their Professional Learning Systems.”

The recommendations are meant for the leadership in educational systems and focus on what would need to be done to help improve professional development and are as follows:

• Rethink how teachers’ time is allocated.
• Connect teacher evaluations with professional learning systems.
• Value opportunities for teachers to learn from one another.
• Establish career pathways encouraging teachers to lead without leaving the
• Classroom
• Expand professional learning offerings and access points.

From a research perspective, this is a relatively small study which only seven teachers across multiple continents interviewed and observed. However, the recommendations are a great starting point for discussion on ways to improve professional development for teachers and do align with other reports published by the CCSSO. Furthermore, educators have known for a long time what types of PD they prefer to attend and that is clearly outlined in Park Rogers in 2007. Educators found that professional development is most effective when:

1. content is relevant and applicable to classrooms
2. it engages teachers in learning content through modeling and in similar manners to how their students will learn, and
3. it allows teachers to form collegial relationships through networking with other teachers and the facilitators.

The fact the recommendations from the study are meant to guide educational systems, the first question I would be interested in hearing is from a district leader’s perspective as to “what is the purpose of in-service days or professional development?” This may be the initial point at which the potential breakdown between needs of the teachers and selections of the district occur. I would think it would be fair to say that teachers have a different perspective as to what they “need” to grow than perhaps what the district “needs” for them to know. There is no doubt that sharing of district initiatives needs to happen but perhaps these should be in addition to the needs of increased content knowledge, collaboration time with like-minded positions or groups across subject or grade level or even personalized programs.

In my personal opinion, it is important for each teacher to seek out the professional development they need even if it is not part of what the district offers. My experience is that many MANY teachers do this automatically each year due to their dedication to their field. So the question that is posed relates to what your state, district or school requires for professional development and if you feel that meets your needs or not? If not, what recommendation would you provide?