I posed an #Edchat Topic recently based on a number of studies I have been reading about that are claiming millions of dollars are being spent, or wasted, on professional development, while very few teachers are benefitting from it. Again the age-old story of doing things the same old way but expecting different results defeats us as a profession. The method of doing professional development for educators has largely not changed over the decades. It may be time to re-examine a few things.
Pedagogy vs. Andragogy
I have addressed this in several earlier posts, but it needs to be re-stated until people finally begin to understand that there are differences in how adults effectively learn, andragogy, compared to the motivations in learning by children, which is pedagogy. Pedagogy is what most educators are familiar with because it was taught to them to enable them to teach kids. It is how kids learn best. The natural thing for an educator to do when he or she is teaching a professional development course however is to go with what he or she knows. The result is that professional development is taught to adults as if they were children learners. How effective is that result going to be?
Collaboration vs. Lecture
Key factors in adult learning, or the intrinsic motivations for adults to learn are ownership of the learning to meet personal needs and being able to use tomorrow what’s learned today. As a whole adults are better with collaborative learning since it gives them control to direct the learning to what they need to know. It also exposes them to things they may not be aware of through the experiences of others. Conversation is often the best way for them to learn. As an adult, think about your own experiences with how you have most recently learned things successfully. Do not use your childhood experiences of learning.
Conferences vs. Unconferences
Most professional development today is often based on Power Point Presentations. These are nothing more than elaborate lectures. It is a lecture enhanced with visual aids, bells and whistles. If done properly, and not a victim of a death by power point delivery (having every word on every slide read to the audience by the presenter) these presentations are sometimes interesting. The question is, how much was retained by the audience? How many will take action on that lecture the next day in class with their students?
These presentation sessions are the mainstay of most education conferences that are counted on for professional development in the United States. All of these sessions are scheduled in elaborate form so that this menu of sessions can be presented to the attendees in a printed form. The only choice for events are those on the menu which for the most part were arranged through RFP’s almost a year prior to the conference. This holds true in local, state, regional and national conferences of most education organizations.
The Unconference or the Edcamp Model is completely different. It does not rely on Power Point Presentation sessions. It relies on conversational, collaborative sessions led by those who are either familiar with a topic, or by those who are interested in learning about the topic. The attendees decide upon the entire Edcamp schedule of sessions on the morning of the conference. It is designed to meet the needs of their interests. They have control of their own learning, which is a key factor of andragogy.
One way for everyone vs. Individualized instruction
Gathering up all of the staff and forcing them all into sessions in order to check off a box stating that PD was delivered is no way to professionally develop a staff with knowledge, tools, or a mindset that is relevant to their needs. We need to take some time to determine a few things. What it is that the school must provide to reach its goal? What it is that the teachers and administrators have that will help get to that goal? What is the gap that each teacher or administrator must fill between what they know and practice and what they need to achieve the school’s goals? It will obviously be a range of things that will need to be individualized. There may be some common threads that may be presented to groups with similar needs, but a baseline for every individual needs to be established. Technology is often the area of most needed concern. It is the area that continually evolves and requires frequent visitations in order for users in this case teachers to maintain their relevance. Assessments are not done once and finished. They need to be done periodically to accommodate the changes that occur.
Here is a needs assessment form that was used in some North Carolina schools as an example:
School Technology Needs Assessment
Conclusion
Professional Development over the last decades has not worked in education. If it were working we would not be spending all of the time and money on trying to reform the system. As a profession we deal in information and content. We are both consumers and creators. We also impart those methods of consuming and creating to kids. Everything that we rely on to consume and create however is changing at a rate never before experienced. This is all a result of living in a technology-driven society.Technology will continue to evolve and change and this will be a constant. Educators will need to be, to use a tech term, upgraded from time to time. Our problem right now is that we have not yet done it properly, so teachers and administrators are all over the map with experience. We need to account for where each is and get each to where they should be and update accordingly from there.
It is a waste and morally irresponsible to throw money at professional development without considering how it should be done. If it is not working and we know that from our assessment, then we need to change what we are doing. We are educators and we should know how to do this. One poor teacher makes all teachers look bad. Many poor teachers make things far worse. Perhaps the reality is that we have fewer poor teachers, but a number who simply need upgrading. To better educate our kids, we first need to better educate their educators.
Hi Tom,
I fully agree with the need for PD to be different from years’ past. And although the keynote speaker can tweak some interest or cause one to think differently, without collaboration or being connected and supported the change will likely not occur.
However, I do want to suggest that before we look at PD during educators’ careers, it is more important to review pre-service training. The best bang for the buck will always be a strong pre-service program ensuring that all teachers have had intensive time in the classroom as a student teacher.
The old adage, “You can pay now or pay later, but if you pay later it will always cost more” is an important reminder of this focus. Pre-service programs that have high standards and are standardized across the province/states are essential in then benefitting from high quality PD within a teachers’ career.
Although not perfect, I would suggest that this is one of the many reasons why the Province of Alberta is so strong in the educational realm. Only certain universities can offer a BEd program and there is a fair amount of rigour.
I do not disagree with your pre-service leaning. I taught in a pre-sercvice program for years,so I am right there with you. The latest research however is saying that more learning goes on within the first year of the job than all the years of pre-service combined. In light of that our opinion seems to be simply that, an opinion. Thanks
Wow – what a great review, for me at least… New word, Andragogy, for me to consider. Lines up with the approach I take in workshops I do. Thanks for repeating often enough to finally reach me!!!
Great post, Tom. I read the recent TNTP Mirage report with interest. As you suggest, perhaps we are defining PD too restrictively. My PhD findings broaden the traditional definitions of what might be measured or considered as ‘professional learning’. I think it’s worth looking at how studies define PL/PD to see if they really reflect what teachers are doing to grow themselves. Schools might also benefit from thinking more creatively about what transforms beliefs and practice.
Deb
Is there a role for Edchat Interactive http://www.edchatinteractive.org/ in great PD?
Seems to me some of the elements we want are
1) Social Learning
2) Feedback
3) Reflection
4) Coaching
5) Periodicity (happening more than one time)
Sounds like Edchat Interactive to me.
It would be useful if teachers and administrators learned some cognitive psychology. This body of research is never taught in colleges of education, but it explains why prof. development does not transfer into daily behaviors and offers solutions.
Instead the various courses offer outdated edu-nonsense. Andragogy is one candidate. Whoever doubts it, dig into the research which justifies its tenets.
Reblogged this on JO'C's blog.
[…] Poor teachers: Who is to blame? | My Island View […]
The difference between Andragogy and Pedagogy is complete BS. Andragogy is defined as ‘adults taking control of their own learning, with a preference for independent self-directed and/or cooperative learning, were they seek learning experiences at will’ sorry to say but this is the natural way we learn at any age, our brain doesn’t suddenly change the way we learn, from a teacher/authority transferring preselected knowledge to the child in a method of their choosing, which essentially is the pedagogy of teaching children, to a preference for Andragogy when we turn 18.
If adults prefer that their learning is better supported using Andragogy, then there is absolutely no reason to think that children don’t want that too. The differences is that adults will tell you out right when the way you are trying to get them to learn is BS, they have rights, they have money, they have power over their own lives. Children cannot do that in school, their rights are often ignored, they have no money of significance, and have absolutely no power over their own lives. They are told to sit down, and be quite because ‘adults’ know best how they learn. No one actually asked kids how they best learn when pedagogy was ‘developed’ because I assure you school would be vastly different if they had.
Children don’t need Pedagogy and adults Andragogy because no matter what age we all prefer to learn in the same way and the use of these terms is a merely a reflection of the power diiferences between children and adults. Pedagogy is something we do ‘to’ children, andragogy is something we do ‘for’ adults
I do not disagree with you on your major argument. That is how I first became involved with the difference between Pedagogy and Andragogy. I wrote many of those observations in a post in 2013, “Pedagogy vs. Andragogy”. I think the key goal here in teaching any learner is to provide a path to self-motivated learning, so that continuous learning becomes a motivation in itself. We need that for all children and adults. That, however requires a mindset and not a workshop.
[…] again, Tom Whitby has knocked it out of the park with a recent post “Poor teachers: Who is to blame?” I shudder at the expression “Poor teachers” but it’s a hook to get you […]
As a new district level coach building PD, your recent posts have been very helpful and relevant to me. I do my best to build engaging PD filled with voice, choice, challenge, and collaboration, but I still find many of our district’s PD is built with old practices in mind. Even I have to be mindful as I find these habits engrained in me.
So how do we shift the views of those around us? It seems we need to start from scratch in many ways. We, as people, make numerous assumptions that adult learners can be lectured at and talked to.
I’m with you Tom Whitby!! I will do my best practice effective professional development and shake up the rest of the system. Thanks again sharing your thoughts!
[…] Doug Peterson’s post, “Thinking about Professional Learning”, based on Tom Whitby’s post, “Poor Teachers, Who is to Blame”. […]