By Dennis Sparks

Results, Dec/Jan. 2000

For anyone who still doubts the critical link between staff development and student learning, all reservations should be removed by the 21 recipients of the U.S. Department of Education’s National Awards Program for Model Professional Development. Since 1997, the USDOE has recognized schools and school districts that have implemented powerful forms of staff development and shown evidence of improved student learning in areas targeted by teachers’ professional learning.

In September 1999, Joellen Killion, NSDC’s director of special projects, completed a WestEd (one of USDOE’s 10 regional laboratories) study of schools that won the award during the program’s first two years. She concluded: "The eight schools differ dramatically from one another: from elementary to high schools; from high poverty neighborhoods in ethnically diverse urban centers to suburbs with little diversity in student population; from a predominance of regular education students to totally students of immigrants or special needs students. Regardless of the grade level, setting, student population, or context, experiences at the eight sites are strikingly parallel."

Killion found that these schools were spurred into action by external forces and had strong leadership from principals and teachers. They also had high expectations for all students and adequate resources in terms of partnerships, technology, and funding. Their goals were aligned with local, state, and national standards for student learning, and new forms of professional development enabled adult learning and collaborative work.

Not surprisingly, teachers in these schools engaged in diverse and extensive learning experiences. These teachers, Killion pointed out, ". . . work hard . . . often on their own time. They work outside their comfort zones. They come together and make decisions to influence the direction of their entire school. . . . They support and coach one another in a community of learners. They demand the best of themselves and their colleagues."

Another commonality was that staff members in these award-winning schools possessed a deep sense of responsibility for improving student learning and measured success primarily in terms of student achievement. Schools used data to identify the strengths and weaknesses of individual students, determine the direction of their professional development program, plan instruction, and gauge progress.

Time for teachers’ learning was typically provided within the work day, which enabled schools to provide numerous opportunities for both formal and informal learning. "[P]rofessional development for teachers can be less formal, less externally driven, and less structured," Killion observed. "When teachers know what they need to learn to improve their students’ achievement, they will do whatever it takes to create opportunities to acquire the knowledge and skills to be successful."

In addition to the traditional processes of conferences and workshops, professional development occurred when teachers studied their students’ work, coached or supported one another on teaching teams, participated in study groups, conducted action research, designed curriculum, visited other schools, and mentored or were mentored by colleagues. "With strong leadership, dedicated people who work and learn within a community of learners, adequate resources, focused and clear goals, and multiple, rich opportunities for professional learning, student achievement will increase . . .," Killion concluded.

This diverse set of award-winning schools demonstrate the critical role that staff development plays in improving student achievement. For those who remain unconvinced, perhaps it is time to have an awards program for schools that can prove they improve student learning with negligible teacher learning. When no such schools can be found, we may have finally proven to even the most skeptical policy makers and educational leaders that meaningful school reform requires a significant investment in teachers’ knowledge and skills.