Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i0TGBYI18723; Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:11:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 11:11:34 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <335F0DBA.1683D153.0AB94E44@aol.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: AndresMuro@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:946] Re: from Cris, research and evaluation of PD X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0 Status: O Content-Length: 6353 Lines: 104 Hi, I have a grant from Pfizer to do PD in relation to health literacy. So far, I have travelled to 8 or so communities throughout the country and over 200 teachers have participated in the workshop. At the end of the workshop, the teachers do a workshop eveluation form. I am trying see if teachers have learned something new from the workshop, if they feel that the model is useful, and if the feel that they can apply the model into their daily practice. I will do the data analysis of the collected data sometime in May or June. I am hoping that the evaluation form can determine if teachers felt that the worhsop may have been useful to their practice. Beyond that, I have no illusions that the workshop will have much impact, even though a few teachers reported back that they incorporated the knowledge into their practice. However, I am aware that most ABE teachers are tied to an enormous bureaucracy, as well as WIA/NRS requirements. While I am sure that the worshop may be compatible and useful to wia/nrs, I believe that teachers have to be very skilled and have a lot of experience and training to do health literacy, or for that matter community literacy stuff, while meeting WIA/NRS requirements. Part time teachers, tied to absurd bureaucracies, with no background in adult education will not be able to do this. Andres In a message dated 1/29/2004 10:22:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, "Mary Russell" <russell@literacy.upenn.edu> writes: >Hear hear. I couldn't agree more, Chris. What we really need to look at in >PD evaluation is the effect of the PD on the practice of the teacher >herself. What has she changed? Is the change effective? What does she see >differently? Trying to find this out will, as you point out, require >considerably more data collection and follow up than we presently >employ--and a re-tooling of the instruments we have been using to measure >the effectiveness of PD. For example, the ubiquitous "evaluation" form that >is requested at the close of every workshop is not really useful unless >1)the questions asked are relevant to the purpose of the particular >workshop, not generic and 2) someone takes a look and analyzes the data. To >my knowledge, neitherof these conditions is usually met. > > ----- Original Message ----- >From: "jataylor" <jataylor@utk.edu> >To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> >Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 9:43 PM >Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:944] from Cris, research and evaluation of PD > > >> The following post is from Cris Smith. Please read on! Jackie >> >> ******************************************************* >> >> Where there is research clearly indicating better student outcomes >> associated with the way teachers teach, then professional development >> should only be evaluated on and accountable for whether the professional >> development is associated with teachers teaching in that way. This is >> hard enough to do by itself, requiring observations or at least clear >> self-reporting of how the teacher teaches before and after attending the >> professional development. Without a large influx of evaluation dollars, >> we should not be required to show that professional development leads >> teachers to teach in a certain way AND that teaching in that way leads >> to student outcomes. Such research requires two levels of data >> collection (how the teachers teach before and after the professional >> development >> and how the students achieve both before and much later down the line) >> and is thus twice >> as expensive and complicated. >> >> I feel that professional development research and evaluation should only >> be responsible >> for making the connection between the professional development and >> teachers' teaching; other research on the connection between teaching >> and learning should make the connection with student outcomes. An >> example of this are the What Works studies (ESOL and beginning-level >> readers) that looked at what types of teaching activities (use of >> authentic materials, direct instruction in the components of reading, >> etc.) were associated with greater student achievement in reading, other >> things (such as hours of student attendance) being equal; however, these >> studies are not yet available from the Department of Education so we >> can't look at them for guides on how to plan professional development >> yet. >> >> However, since the research on teaching and learning is limited enough >> in our field, as Andres pointed out and the recent review of research on >> adult reading instruction sponsored by NIFL reveals, there aren't a >> whole lot of topics on which we professional developers can use the >> pre-established association of teaching and learning if we are thinking >> about evaluation. Even to gauge the effectiveness of the >> professional development on teaching practices requires well-funded >> evaluation or research. I think there is methodology that can provide >> some information about the effectiveness of professional development on >> what teachers do in the classroom. I just think it's beyond the budgets >> of most state professional development systems to conduct this type of >> evaluation, even for a limited sample of the professional development >> they offer, because it requires collecting good information on teaching >> practices before and after (sometimes long after) the professional >> development. I fear >> that if we spent such resources on evaluating all of the professional >> development offered, precious little, if any, would remain for actually >> offering professional development activities, let alone paying teachers' >> release time to attend. I believe this argues for dedicated research >> and evaluation monies for evaluating a small sample of professional >> development in the state, and that should be limited to looking at the >> connection between professional development and teachers' practices >> where those practices are supported by other research, rather than an >> evaluation that tries to make the connection between the professional >> development and student outcomes. >> >> Cristine Smith >> Deputy Director, NCSALL >> World Education >> 44 Farnsworth Street >> Boston, MA 02210 >> csmith@worlded.org >> (617) 482-9485 >> >> > > -- go here: www.geocities.com/andresmuro/art.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:45:37 EST