Transforming Professional Development into Student Results By Douglas B. Reeves

1. Transforming Professional Development into Student ResultsBy Douglas B. Reeves University of Mount Union ED 607 Group B Renee Beeker Jennifer Schaeffer Gina Serluco

2. The Law of Initiative Fatigue • Lack of Focus • To many programs or practices implemented • Use of popular rather then substantive • Looking for the quick fix • Superficial Implementation • Lack of practice • Lack of accountability • Lack of Individual & Organizational Effectiveness (Reeves 2010)

3. Priority • Is doing more really accomplishing more? • Reeves shares the myth of multitasking, a fellow author Crenshaw (2008) describes as “switch-tasking.” • The cost to you and your organization or school, is the loss of effectiveness. Reeves (2010)

4. Power Standards for Teachers and Leaders • Reeves shares Ainsworth’s, (2003) Power Standards concept, as there is not enough time in a year to teach all the academic content standards (p. 29). • “Leverage” Standards that influence more then a single discipline such as… • Non Fiction Writing, Critical Thinking, Problem Solving Skills • “Endurance” Standards that have long standing relevance such as… numbers sense and reading comprehension. • Essential for the next level. What does a student need to succeed? Reeves (2010)

5. Power Standards for Middle School Students • Reeves offers an example of “Power Standards” that Middle School Students need to enter high school, figure 3.1 (p. 31). • A far shorter perhaps more focused list of standards for students • Reeves (2010) asked, “Why have we not establish standards for adult learning?” (p. 30).

6. How to Avoid the Law of Initiative Fatigue • Prioritize Learning Standards Administrators and Teachers find most important to improve student success. • Teachers must: • Understand Academic Content for the next level. • Provide feedback in timely and effective manner to support student success. • Prepare lessons to be engaging, adaptive and differentiated. • Show you understand the different needs of each student. • Administrators must: • Understand the academic requirements of schools they send students to or receive students from. • Provide feedback to teachers and staff in timely and effective manner. • Prepare staff meetings and professional development opportunity that are engaging, adaptive and differentiated. • Show you understand the need of each staff member.

7. The Myths and Realities of Planning • Proverb: “If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail” • “Poor planning leads to poor results” • Is there a significant difference in outcomes from planning versus not planning? • School improvement plans are increasing, yet student results are not • Debate is: Centralized planning vs. effective reform • Debate should be: “Which specific characteristics of educational plans are most related to student achievement?” (p. 34).

8. The Research • The Leadership and Learning Center • Examined 2,500 improvement plans • Appendix A, starting on pg. 109, shows results of the various schools and grade levels from the study in graphic visuals organized by percentages of student gains in relation to their rated school goals on a 1-2-3 scale • Appendix B describes these goals within the 1-2-3 rubric • Found that planning is never always successful or unsuccessful • Rather, plans have specific characteristics • Have a direct, consistent, positive, & powerful relationship to student results (p. 34). • Few planning practices directly relate to student results

9. Plans Associated with Success • Based on the study, these characteristics of planning proved measurable and significant effect on gains in student achievement (reading & math K-12) • Comprehensive Needs Assessment • Inquiry Process • Prioritization • Specificity • Measurability • Achievability • Relevance • Timeliness • Monitoring • Effect was greatest for high-poverty, low-performing schools (Fernandez 2006) • These 9 element may be misleading as to be too generalized. • Reeves’s suggestion: Policy makers’ creation of a menu of planning options based on the current students’ needs and limit the areas of focus. • Large-scale improvement happens with few school improvement goals are implemented deeply

10. Linear vs. Nonlinear • Sometimes school progress based on planning is very linear • Appendix A, Figure A.1, “proving time requirement of school goals (planning) had a great impact on student achievement” • Reeves (2010) states: “The relationship of leadership decision making in school planning to student achievement is nonlinear.” (p. 36). • As school quality increases, student gains will not always comparably increase • Some results showed inconsistency over quality levels • Overall, partial effort in implementation was found to be worse than very little with efforts or even no effort at all (see Appendix A, Figure A.15, A.19) • Energy, time, & money is spent on the beginning efforts of change • Leaders do not follow through • Teachers are frustrated • Past study results align (Reeves, 2006) • 200 schools had identical claims on professional development • Reality showed actual implementation from a less than10% to over90% range • Those with over 90% had 3-5 times higher student achievement gains than those under 10%

11. Programs, Practices, or People? • Reeves asks the question, “Should schools invest in programs or should they instead focus on practices and people?” (2010) • “Brand-Name Fallacy” • Cites McGuffey’s Readers as a prime example • He suggests that it isn’t the brand name that creates the fascination with reading • Rather, it is the practices and people in the classroom • “If our heart’s desire is to provide students with more challenging and engaging reading, then we need teachers and parents who are willing to do what William McGuffy, J.K. Rowling, and Brian Jacques did – trust that if the reading is sufficiently engaging, young readers can be counted upon to struggle with the material and not only will rise to the challenge but will enjoy it.” Reeves (2010)

12. Programs • Often generate conflicting opinions amongst teachers • “Today’s programs invariably have the potential to be tomorrow’s dinosaurs.” • Too often schools invest in a program to increase student achievement but it is short-lived • Reeves suggests looking at the instructional programs that have been implemented in the last 5 years – how many are still in place? • “People and practices endure; programs rarely do.” • What is left when software licenses expire and the binders are long gone? - PEOPLE Reeves (2010)

13. Conditions for Success • Teacher Assignment – the best teachers should be in the classrooms with the students that need them the most • Monitoring Practices – leaders must provide monitoring that focuses on adult actions, that is frequent and constructive • Time Allocation – a critical condition for success is allowing time for the deep implementation of learning initiatives • Reeves points out that these three things do no necessarily mean success but should be present Reeves (2010)

14. Misallocation of Time • Pull-outs • Announcements • E-mail • Reeves suggests that institutional multitasking is no more effective than asking students to multitask by writing an essay and send text messages – it’s not really multitasking – students are just jumping back and forth between the two tasks. • Fragmentation and lack of focus Reeves (2010)

15. Professional Learning is . . . the Problem? • “Rather than provide the one or two useful ideas for which our colleagues are pleading, some programs are actively counterproductive, crowding out useful practice with useless and time-consuming programs.” • Reeves argues that sustainability comes through practice • “When people young and old focus, they improve practice.” • Fewer initiatives Reeves (2010)

16. From Frantic to Focused • Taxonomy of professional development • Preservice Education • Courses for Recertification • Training • Information Dissemination • Presentations • Powerful Designs • Reeves suggests that professional learning is stuck on level 3 – Training Reeves (2010)

17. Assessing Professional Learning • Ask the following questions: • Look at a calendar and find a seminar, presentation, institute, etc. that you took 3 years ago – what do you remember about it? • Can you name 1 or 2 influences this program had on your teaching or leadership practices today? • To what extent were you surprised by the recollection of program and ideas that seemed inspiring but are no longer relevant today?

18. Assessing Professional Learning Cont’d • Looking ahead, what proportion of dates are still blank for professional learning because you are waiting on a topic or confirmation from a speaker? • What proportion of your professional learning calendar for the year ahead suggests a commitment to the refinement, reinforcement, and deliberate practice & perfection of the practices that are most essential for your school? Reeves (2010)

19. Key Concepts: • Deep implementation is essential for an effect on student results. • Hypothesis (Figure 4.1) that the higher the dress of implementation, the higher the impact of learning • Leadership decisions have a decisive effect on student results and the effect of leadership is the result of deep implementation and clear focus. • (Based on Sharratt & Fullan, 2009 and Marzano, 2005 case studies, p. 37). • Reeves (2010) concludes: “Gains in student achievement are most likely to result from the selective use of small number of planning elements that can be implemented deeply” (p. 40).

20. Key Concepts • Educational Leadership Requires Focus • Deep Implementation of a few Practices not Programs • Accountability for Time, Energy and Resources.

21. Applications • Reeve’s study of school planning, implementation and monitoring showed: • With focus and deep implementation of only a few improvements students’ success was improved greatly • Appendix A shows results of various strategies measured student proficiency gains (p. 105-139). Reeves (2010)

22. ApplicationsAppendix B of Reeve’s Study of school Planning, Implementation & Monitoring Rubric • Shows that time needs to be taken to develop a comprehensive inquiry and needs assessment that includes: • Measureable specific and achievable goals • Targeted research based strategies • Planned professional development that is “focus” and deeply implemented will support improvements in student proficiency(p.137-143). Reeves (2010)

23. ApplicationsStandards for Professional Learning • Support increase educator effectiveness & student results by: • Focusing on Professional Learning • Prioritizing, coordinating and monitoring recourses • Integrating theories, research and models of human learning • Aligning educator performance outcomes with student curriculum standards • Leadership developing capacity, advocating and creating support systems for professional learning • Using several sources of student, educator and system data to plan, assess and evaluate professional learning • Applying research on change and sustain support for implementation of professional learning for LONG term change Learning Forward http://www.learningforward.org/standards-for-professional-learning