Hello,
These questions and comments will be very helpful for guiding revisions
to the PD standards, although I want to echo the sentiment that whatever
AALPD creates will only be useful if it is revisited and contextualized
by the “stakeholders” in each state system.  What’s valuable about
standards is that they prompt a conversation about quality – what it is
and how we know it when we see it – and that it’s this conversation that
builds ownership and buy-in to a common vision. The challenge is to make
sure that the next “generation” of practitioners get to join this
conversation rather than be handed down a static set of expectations to
meet. 

I also want to add a reminder that before AALPD drafted standards, it
drafted a set of policies designed to ensure that quality PD would be
supported by the funding and infrastructure it requires
(http://aalpd.org/priorities_pdpolicies.htm). Standard #11 (which states
that effective PD “is based on a set of policies that support
practitioners’ access to quality professional development”) is our
attempt to make this linkage very explicit. Separating the standards
from the policy document creates the potential for the abuse (unfunded
mandates) that Ira, Katie, and others have mentioned. 

As I look at Standard #11 again, though, I’m noticing a different cause
for concern - the indicators (and the related policies in the policy
document) speak to the working conditions of teachers but not the
working conditions of professional developers. It strikes me that an
organization representing the interests of professional developers might
want to reconsider this! (See
http://www.mcae.net/QualityWCStandardsandIndicators0207fin.pdf for the
MA Coalition for Adult Education’s Standards for Quality Working
Conditions – also focused on teachers but a model we could draw from.) 

Finally, just a couple of points of clarification:
- The Standards are intended to describe a coherent, quality PD system,
so I agree with Wendi that individual PD activities will not meet every
standard. 
- The Indicators are examples of what implementation of the Standard
could look like, not prescriptions. Local negotiation and interpretation
of what those Indicators should be would make for very rich PD. 

Please continue the critique!
Andy Nash
anash at worlded.org