The best worst PD ever

Professional development for teachers can be a powerful experience to improve a teacher’s effectiveness in the classroom by developing the factual and conceptual basis of knowledge of teaching in addition to providing an opportunity to reflect on one’s instructional practices. That is to say, develop our metacognition, or thinking about one’s thinking. The most effective professional development has four components which make the initiative successful.  

First, professional development emphasizes comprehension and understanding instead of memorizing. Next, the professional development provides the learner with chances to integrate the new information into their job. This, in turn, allows the learner to implement the new strategies into “real world” experiences. Finally, the most effective professional development is focused on authentic tasks, attainable for the learner to implement and sustain. Unfortunately, in 2008, I sat through an eight-hour professional development session that offered none of these components.

The school in which I had been working at had begun a new program to install interactive whiteboards into each classroom.  It was decided by school leadership that all faculty and staff should have professional development to learn the best practices in using interactive whiteboards in the classroom.  A commendable idea to offer this professional development for teachers regarding new instructional technology, however; it was tragically flawed from the outset.

Remember when this was the latest instructional technology?

The professional development was held in the spring of 2008 during the final month of the school year.  Sadly, the interactive whiteboards were not installed in the classrooms until October of the following school year. We all know the value of training individuals and teams so as to have a positive impact on the performance of both individuals and groups within schools. However, this professional development experience did not consider Informational Processing theory or Cognitive Load theory.

The presentation consisted of one presenter demonstrating the various uses of an interactive whiteboard for eight hours.  During those hours I truly came to understand the old teacher adage …

Teachers did not have an opportunity to try using the interactive whiteboard and thus had little chance to activate working memory.  Nor did teachers have an opportunity to experiment using the interactive whiteboards in their classrooms later (because we didn’t have any!).  

The result was that teachers did not have a chance to transfer knowledge from the working memory to long-term memory. Perhaps if faculty had a chance to return to their classrooms which had interactive whiteboards this problem could have been mitigated.  Regretfully, this was not the case and teachers had to wait until a month into the next school year to have access to technology.

Perhaps if the presenter had considered Cognitive Load theory he would have considered the circumstances of the teacher/learners and restructured the professional development sessions to address the circumstances and needs of the teachers in attendance.  

The fact is that working memory is limited in individuals. The operation of interactive whiteboards, fairly new technology in 2008, was considered a complex task at the time. For context, the iPhone was not released until 2007 and most teachers could not yet afford such a device.  Additionally, the interactive features of Wi-Fi connected whiteboards were not yet commonplace in schools. The end result was a professional development session in which teachers felt lost and drained at the end of the day. No one was excited about this great innovation coming to our school.

It would have been better if the school leadership at the time would have made the commitment to long-term sustained professional development. Had the professional development been offered just before or after the interactive whiteboards were installed teachers could have focused on understanding rather than memorizing features of the technology.  

It would have also provided a chance for teachers to intentionally practice what they had learned during the professional development training. Perhaps most importantly, it would have allowed teachers to apply what they had learned to the different content areas they taught.  

Fortunately, once the interactive whiteboards were installed a small group of teachers and I started experimenting with the new technology and began sharing with one another and other teachers the different features of the interactive whiteboards. This #roguepd was

  1. Authentic because it aligned with our daily classroom experiences.
  2. Feasible because we conducted five to ten-minute training sessions and/or teachers voluntarily observed each other’s classrooms whenever time allowed
  3. Sustainable because it carried on throughout the year and the next

Exactly, what effective professional development should be. That year was one of the best professional development experiences I have had in my career.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s