iPD: Rethinking Professional
Development
in Districts
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
Amy Hodges Slamp
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
College Ready Work Team
May 24, 2013
EVERY PERSON DESERVES
THE CHANCE TO LIVE A
HEALTHY, PRODUCTIVE LIFE.
© 2011 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
|
2
Our Areas of Focus at the Foundation
25%
United States Program
25%
Global Development Program
50%
Global Health Program
© 2011 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
|
4
By 2025, 80% of
students graduate from high school
college and career ready so they can
be successful in their the community
and the world.
© 2011 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
|
9
College-Ready Work
Empowering Effective
Teachers
Will
lead to
More
Effective
Teachers
with
better
tools &
supports
Will
lead to
80%
Transformed
College
Education
Readiness
System
Rate
Next Generation
Learning
Advocacy
Research & Data
Milestones
Outcomes
Impact
iPD Update
What’s
the problem
we are trying to solve
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
with PD?
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
iPDgood
Updatenews is,
The
we
know
what
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
matters!
The difference in student learning between having a teacher in the top quartile of
effectiveness and the bottom quartile is 7.5 months in math. (MET)
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
PD today vs iPD:
What
Current Context
Future Context
iPD Impact
Access
One shot workshops with limited followup.
Job embedded with easy access to
supports.
PD resources available to teachers 24/7
at work and at home.
Frequency
Limited and/ or sporadic support.
On demand and accessible support
initiated by teacher.
Teachers participate in professional
learning daily.
Quality
Most systems do not define or measure
PD.
PD has a demonstrated impact on
student learning.
PD quality assessed through linkage to
student learning data
Delivery
Labor intensive limits the frequency of
PD.
Menu of quality options offered on
demand.
Increased access to PD without
increasing labor costs.
Feedback
Limited feedback; not tied to PD.
Unlimited opportunities for feedback to
inform PD.
Teachers have access to a range of
informal, high quality feedback to
support their instruction.
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
Design
One size fits all.
Differentiated learning strategies.
Teachers have access to different modes
of support through collaboration, 1:1 and
alone.
Context
No or little connection to data.
PD informed by reliable sources and
types of data.
Teachers have up to date information on
how to improve student learning.
Coherence
Fragmented.
Aligned with CCSS and measures of
effective teaching.
Professional learning is integrated into
the daily routine of teachers.
Source: Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the U.S. and
Abroad, Darling-Hammond, Linda, Stanford University, 2009.
Key components of iPD:
 PERSONALIZED
 TECH ENABLED
 JOB EMBEDDED
iPD Update
 ADAPTIVE & MASTERY BASED
 DATA INFORMED
 FRAMED
BY DISTRICT’S
CRW
Team Meeting
May INSTRUCTIONAL
1, 2013
THEORY OF ACTION & DEFINED
MEASURES OF EXCELLENCE IN MULTIPLE
DOMAINS
PERFORMANCE
EXPECTATIONS
PERSONALIZED
STANDARDS
FOR EFFECTIVE
INSTRUCTION
QUALITY PD
PROTOCOLS &
EXPERIENCES
CURRENT
TEACHING
PERFORMANCE
COMMUNITIES &
NETWORKS
Thank you TeachLive for
giving
us
a
model
of
what
iPD Update
great PD and teacher training
look
like.
We
are
excited
you
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
are partnering with us in our
work!!!
Launching the iPD Challenge:
• Launching with 5 districts as
proof points
• Adding
iPDadditional
Updatedistricts this
fall and networks next year
• Districts must commit to a set of
CRW
Team Meeting
Maylearning
1, 2013 and
priorities,
sharing
participating in research
• We are hoping to catalyze the
market by both supply and
demand
iPD Challenge Participants Commit to:
•
•
•
•
Whole system redesign
Aligned initiatives/coherence goal
Data systems
in place or in process
iPD Update
Supporting value propositions of
teacher
voice, jobMay
embedded
CRW
Team Meeting
1, 2013 and
mastery based PD
• Research for group learning and
participation in community of
practice
Tight Outcomes, Loose Metrics:
•
Outcome #1: Improve processes for identifying
individual teacher professional development needs
•
Outcome #2: Improve the match of professional
development plans with teacher needs.
•
Outcome #3: Broaden the topics and delivery modes
of high quality professional development.
iPD Update
CRW Team Meeting May 1, 2013
•
Outcome #4: Improve the feedback provided teachers
on their instruction linked to the district’s method of
measuring instructional quality
•
Outcome #5: Increase the proportion of teachers who
are empowered and effective
What’s next?
• We are just at the beginning but
we are excited and hopeful
iPD
Update
• We are
working
with great
partners to do great things
May
1, share
2013 what
•CRW
WeTeam
wantMeeting
to learn
and
we learn
“Swing for the Fences”