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 j0HE2Vn07435; Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:02:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:02:31 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <41FE2299@webmail.utk.edu> 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: jataylor <jataylor@utk.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1915] Paid Professional Development, Update from States X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Infinite Mobile Delivery (Hydra) SMTP v3.62.01 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Status: O Content-Length: 8982 Lines: 153 NIFL-AALPD Colleagues: Below are preliminary results of the AALPD survey about paid professional development. Please read on. For those who have not yet had an opportunity to respond to the survey: We will soon have a new way to work together online in tandem with this discussion list where we can capture and refine what we know about issues like paid professional development for adult education teachers. By discussing important questions here, we can then later refine them and develop positions on policies to take to advocacy organizations like the National Coalition for Literacy, that advocates for supportive legislation and funding in our field. I will send out more information in February about this new way for us to work together online, and you will have another opportunity to contribute and expand what we know about paid PD in states. In the meantime, what about the information and comments stand out to you? See below, Jackie Taylor List Facilitator, NIFL-AALPD ========================================================== Paid Professional Development, Update from States Eleven practitioners, program directors, professional developers, or state office staff from nine states responded to AALPD’s request for information about paid professional development: Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, and Tennessee. The following is an overview of the information and comments they submitted. Does your state offer and require teachers to receive paid professional development? Two states have a requirement of a minimum amount of paid professional development release time for each teacher. Massachusetts has a requirement of 50 hours (full-time teacher, pro-rated for part-time teachers, minimum of 15 hours) of paid professional development release time for each teacher per year. Ohio supports attendance with individual stipends. Part-time teachers who teach less than seven hours are required to attend one professional development activity. Teachers who teach more than seven hours are required to attend two activities. Two states support paid professional development time by funding and requiring programs to offer it, but it is up to the program how much it gives to each teacher. In Florida, it is up to each individual program as to whether or not to pay teachers for their participation in professional development. Maine has set the minimum standard for attending professional development at 12 hours for all ABE teachers, regardless of full or part time status. Program directors choose how much money to put into a professional development line item. It is up to programs to decide if these funds are used to compensate for teachers’ time, or to give to teachers to purchase materials that support their professional development. Four states do not have a requirement or policy for paid professional development at this time. It is up to the program to offer it or not. The New Mexico Teacher’s Council conducted a survey in 2003-2004 and found that ABE teachers in New Mexico received an average of 13 hours of paid professional development release time during the year and 12 per cent reported they did not receive paid release time for professional development activities. Both South Carolina and Tennessee do not provide additional funding to pay teachers to attend professional development. If the teacher chooses to attend and misses teaching a class, then they are compensated for their time. If they do not miss class (i.e. attends on a Saturday or other days the adult educator is not scheduled to work), then they are not compensated for their time. As a result, teachers who work more hours are more likely to attend professional development, because the meetings are more likely to occur on one of their instructional days. In South Carolina, PD is often scheduled on Fridays, and most adult education programs don't operate on Fridays. So even full-time people have to "give their own time" to attend, and many do. Tennessee teachers likewise often participate in professional development. However, Tennessee adult education teachers who get paid for professional development cannot use those hours towards their K-12 recertification. Likewise, Texas does not have funds specifically to pay teachers to attend professional development. Texas programs are faced with either paying teachers to attend, or using funds for direct services, and the respondent reported that the latter is often what many programs do. The respondent from North Carolina was uncertain if there was a policy for paid professional development release time in her state. More information is needed. Two states reported additional information on teacher "credentialing" or "incentive" programs. This information is available upon request. Policies for Paid Professional Development Survey respondents were asked: What do you think about every state having a policy of funding and requiring programs to provide 2.5% of a teacher's annual paid hours as paid professional development release time? (For a full-time teacher working 40 hours a week for 40 weeks, this would be equivalent to 40 hours a year of paid professional development release time, or 5 full days. For a part-time teacher working 15 hours per week for 40 weeks, this would be 15 hours a year. Teachers who work less than 15 hours per week would also receive a minimum of 15 hours per year.) Most respondents discussed the importance of establishing a strong commitment to professional development and that professional development is an important part of running a successful adult education agency. Most were in strong support of having a policy for paid professional development. Some respondents cited questions and challenges. Comments include: 1. A policy requiring paid release time would not only benefit the teacher but also the program in general. The downfall might be the funds necessary to provide a substitute when the teacher is away. 2. The policy would be great - but I know what our state director would say - "we can't afford it and I can't mandate local programs to do any more...” Many AE teachers in [my state] may only teach 3-6 hours a week and we find that it's hard to get these teachers to attend any PD offerings. 3. Just about any formula would be wonderful, if there were the funding to support it, which could be a stretch in some places. As the director of a small part time adult ed and ABE program that does receive AEFLA funds, I've always encouraged and expected my instructors to participate in PD, whether through our own program or state offerings, or on their own initiative. I do set aside some of the allowable federal funds (which have been matched, as required, by local tax money) into budget lines that can be used for "staff development". My instructors can use it to give themselves "honoraria" rather than additional pay, though I do include the expectation of 12 hrs/year to be "budgeted" on their part for such PD as they choose, or they can purchase materials or services to aide in their personal PD plans. We haven't formalized the individual PD plans as well as I would like, but that is a growing expectation for AEFLA programs here in [my state]. It's the part time status that is the real monkey wrench. If I could pay people professional level wages (myself included!) rather than hourly, piecemeal, we could move more rapidly to that place where PD serves as the instructor's learning and teaching model that benefits the student as well. I am extremely fortunate to have very dedicated people willing to go the extra mile and who are inveterate life long learners themselves, so everything has some level of PD to it. 4. This is below the requirement in [my state], which is very minimal. I would suggest 5% of a teacher's time. 5. We have discussed this in our state. We strongly believe in professional development. Our difficulty is ensuring that our part-time profession can get the training. We are exploring other ways of providing PD which expends money for developmental costs. So at this time, I need to explore the possibilities and the benefits more before I would support either issue. This issue does need to be explored in more detail. 6. I think professional development is important and I think there should be policies that require it, follow up to make sure it's done and enforce it if it's not being done. I think professional development needs to be evaluated in terms of teacher performance as well as the impact it has on the learners. I also think professional development is more than just workshop attendance and should be things that are meaningful to the instructor and/or also include time to meet/discuss/roundtable with the peers he/she works with. ==========================================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:30 EST