District/Building Profile

Iowa Professional Development Model

The purpose of this profile is to guide the district/building administrators, the Professional Development (PD) Leadership Team, and the PD provider in conducting an optional self-analysis of the effectiveness of their district/building professional development. By reviewing what is in place for PD at the district and building level, district leaders have an opportunity to make adjustments and add supports to ensure that the professional development provided to teachers results in improved instructional practices and increased student achievement. This rubric is offered as a tool to analyze and describe the status of PD plans, processes, and learning opportunities.

The rubric components, dimensions, and descriptors follow the Iowa Professional Development Model (IPDM) and requirements for the district career development plans. A description of the desired level of full implementation of effective practice is listed in the left column (Level 4). Four levels are offered to provide practitioners with descriptions that show progress from non-implementation on the right, with movement toward effective practices and procedures on the left. Ratings are offered to indicate the levels of attention that are needed to move from non-implementation to full implementation of the IPDM components.

To complete this rubric, read the definition of the component, and the four descriptors for each dimension, and then circle the number that most reflects the status of your building/district. If your situation is best described by statements in more than one level, you may also highlight or underline items that describe your status. Space is provided to add evidence that supports the ratings.

LEA: ________________________________________________________________

Building: _____________________________________________________________

Individual(s) Completing Rubric:__________________________________________

Date: ________________________________________________________________

Key to ratings:

4= Fully implemented, ready to showcase and use as an example for others

3= Adjustments and some refinement may be needed

2= Additional attention and effort needed to fully develop this element

1= Intensive technical assistance needed

Component: Collecting and Analyzing Student Data

Identifying student need is the first step in designing professional development intended to improve student learning. Collecting and analyzing information about student performance in areas of interest enables a district and/or school to set priorities. If professional development is to impact student learning, it must precisely align with student need.

Dimension 1: Uses analysis of multiple sources of data.

Multiple sources of data are displayed in a way that facilitates dialogue with staff. Written summary of findings about student achievement with interpretation about patterns, trends, and implications has been shared with faculty. Analysis provides enough detail to lead to decisions about practice.

Data are collected from multiple sources, but not analyzed and displayed in a way that makes data understandable to staff. Documentation includes a general summary of the findings with interpretation about patterns, trends, and implications. Analysis is general and of limited help in making decisions about practice.

Scores are provided for multiple sources. Little analysis and interpretation are apparent.

Only one source is provided with little or no analysis.

Dimension 2: Analysis of subgroup data.

Analysis includes the general population as well as findings and implications for all subgroups represented in the district.

Analysis includes findings and implications for some, but not all subgroups represented in the district.

Analysis is reported in nonspecific terms so that conclusions about needs are difficult to make.

There is no analysis, only scores are provided.

Dimension 3: Leadership Team and administrator(s) use and interpret data.

The PD Leadership Team has discussed the data and implications. The PD Leadership Team has engaged the faculty in dialogue about the data and implications. School administrators have been fully engaged in sharing and discussing findings with others. Administrators actively model how to use and interpret data.

The PD Leadership Team has worked with the data and formed some conclusions. The full faculty has not been engaged in dialogue about findings and implications.

School administrator has reported findings to others with little discussion. Administrators do not routinely model the interpretation and use of data.

Data have been reported to staff without opportunities to discuss implications. Administrators and the PD Leadership Team have not worked with faculty on studying data and discussing implications.

The staff has not been engaged in the use of data.

Comments/Evidence:_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Component: Goal Setting for Professional Development

Clear statements of expectations regarding student learning allow schools and districts to focus professional development resources and energy on achievable goals. To meet the goals identified in the Comprehensive School Improvement Plan, the intent of professional development is to increase the learning of all students while attending to the learning needs of subgroups of students. If professional development content is to accomplish the desired increases in student learning, the goals for student learning must be explicit and concrete.

Dimension 4: Professional development target is focused on instruction.

PD Leadership Team has identified a professional development target that is focused on improving student achievement in reading, math or science and provides skill development in instruction.

Professional development target is focused on practices that impact students, but the target does not help teachers to improve academic instruction.

(Example: PD addresses only an affective/behavioral/social emotional goal.)

The target is about procedures rather than instruction. (Example: how to administer assessments.) Target is on adult or systems variable rather than on student learning and instruction.

(Example: culture building, scheduling alternatives.)

The target is exclusively about process. (Example: team building, facilitating meetings.)

Dimension 5: Goals and PD target are aligned with data.

Goals and PD target are aligned with data. There is tight coupling among the data, goals, and the target selected.

Goals are aligned with data, but the target is not related to the goal.

Neither the goals nor the target relate to the data. There is no coupling among data/goals/target.

There is no PD target.

Dimension 6: Target is specific and based on the AIG/MAO and district goals.

Target is based on the Annual Improvement Goal/Measurable Annual Objective and district goals but is narrower and more specific.

PD Target is broad. Lack of specificity makes it difficult to select the strategy/model that teachers need to learn to accomplish gains in student achievement.

PD target is narrow and limited to a single strategy which does not have enough complexity to accomplish significant gains in student achievement.

PD is a set of events without any target, lack of focus is evident.

Provide evidence that the district/building has selected a target that is based on student data and district goals:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dimension 7: There is a singular focus at the district/building for PD.

There is a singular focus at the district/building for PD. Faculty will be able to focus on one major area at a time. Multiple emphases across the district with variation at the building level may be necessary to address student needs established by data.

There are 2-3 focus areas for PD that the same faculty may need to address simultaneously.

Priorities have not been established to narrow PD focus areas; more than 3 focus areas are evident in the building.

PD is a menu of training topic options.

Component: Selecting Content

Content selected for collective study by schools and districts must be supported by evidence that it can accomplish the goals set for student learning. A district should be confident that the content they choose to study has been found to improve student achievement. A process for selecting content will include: a review of research on curricular and instructional innovations with a history of success in the areas identified for student improvement; a review of current knowledge and practices in the district/school; alignment with the Iowa Teaching Standards; and documentation that the practices are supported by scientifically-based research.

Dimension 8: PD content selected addresses needs for full population of students.

PD content selected addresses needs for the full population of students. Decisions about PD for age spans and populations may vary based on data. (Example: An elementary school may work on a district-wide target of reading comprehension by studying graphic organizers and think alouds. The high school may be focusing on using graphic organizers and writing.)

Content is provided for some grade-spans but not others. (Example: PD only addresses K-3 in a K-6 building.)

PD that is appropriate for one age span is provided for all age groups which conflicts with the research. (Example: Phonemic awareness being applied with all students in upper grades.)

District/building plan is not explicit about how PD is addressing student needs. The relationship between what is being studied and student learning needs is not explicit.

Dimension 9: Teachers and leaders were engaged in the decision making about the program/model/strategy.

The PD Leadership Team used a decision making process for selection of content, and appropriate criteria were used to judge the quality of research. Teachers were represented in the decision making about the appropriateness of the program/model/strategy.

The PD Leadership Team chose the content following a process, but without input from staff.

Content was chosen by central office and/or administration. Building Leadership Teams were not part of the process used to study the literature base and make decisions.

Criteria and process for selection are unclear.

Dimension 10: Administrators are well informed about the program/model/strategy.

Administrators are able to clearly articulate what is being studied by the faculty, why this program/model/strategy was selected, and what student outcomes will be accomplished. This information is communicated to the faculty and community.

Administrators know the strategy selected, but are unable to explain the rationale and research that justifies the selection of these practices for study in relation to local student data.

Administrators are unclear about why and how the program was selected, and communicate little about the nature of the content selected.

Administrators consider the selection of content and the need to be familiar with the rationale for selection as someone else’s responsibility.

Dimension 11: Content is well grounded in research base.

Content is well grounded in research base; strategies are supported with studies that meet definitions of scientifically based research. The Iowa Content Network or equivalent source was used to make sure the research is of high quality. Practices selected are at least a level 3 on Content Network continuum.

Content is research related. Practices listed may be based on research done on single strategies, but this combination of strategies has never been evaluated using an experimental or quasi-experimental design.

A list of references is provided, but these sources have never been reviewed to check the type of intervention, population, effect size, etc.

Content was selected based on testimonial data or studies/ articles without a research foundation.

There is no apparent research base or the studies are rated a level 2 or below on the Iowa Content Network.

List the content (strategies, model, or program) and provide evidence that this content has a research base. (Example: a review of the research base, and/or site studies that are reviewed on Iowa Content Network):______________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Component: Design

The professional development process must ensure that teachers have adequate opportunities to learn and implement new curriculums, instructional strategies, and assessments. Teachers need to have sufficient workshop and workplace supports to develop a deep understanding of the theory of the strategy/model they are learning. The professional development design will build in time for teachers to learn together and to collaborate with each other. If teachers have opportunities to learn new content and implement it in their classrooms, the investment in professional development will pay off in increased student learning. If professional development is based on powerful and proven content and implemented as designed, students will benefit.

Dimension 12: Design includes theory, demonstration, practice, and collaboration.

An action plan or building/district plan has been developed. The design for PD includes details about the workshop and workplace supports including:

· Theory (including thorough knowledge of research and rationale for the strategy)

· Demonstration

· Practice

· Collaboration

Plan references elements (theory, demonstration, practice, collaboration), but lacks description about how these will be provided.

There is a building and a district PD plan, but plans do not include any reference to theory, demonstration, practice or collaboration.

The district plan does not provide details about the design. There is no building plan.

Dimension 13: Adequate time for training is provided.

Design describes how time will be made available for intensive PD training. Adequate time for training is provided. Training is distributed and occurs intermittently throughout the school year.

Time is provided for training but the amount of time is not adequate to fully support teacher learning. Design limits teachers’ opportunities to fully participate in theory, demonstration, and practice experiences needed for fidelity of implementation.

Time is limited. Design limits teachers’ opportunities to experience theory, demonstration, practice, etc.

Design does not address finding time.

Dimension 14: Adequate time is provided for collaboration.

Adequate time for collaboration is provided. Teachers meet frequently (about once a week) and for at least 30 minutes per meeting. A schedule is established and announced to all staff. Minutes (data on how meeting time is used) are submitted to the PD Leadership Team.

Time is provided, but meetings are not frequent enough. to support implementation. A schedule is established and announced to all staff. The PD Leadership team collects documentation of how collaborative time is used.

Time planned for collaboration is insufficient to support implementation. Meetings are less than 30 minutes. No data are collected during the meeting to inform the Professional Development Leadership Team of additional support needed.

There is no specific schedule.

Provide evidence that design has required elements and adequate time: (PD plans, calendar, etc): _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

List trainers who will deliver theory, provide demonstrations, etc:

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Component: Ongoing Cycle

Professional development is a continuous process rather than a one-time event. To be able to transfer new learning into the classroom, teachers need multiple opportunities to see demonstrations, plan together, work out problems, rehearse new lessons, develop materials, engage in peer coaching, and observe each other. The collaborative routines needed for supporting these actions must be planned for, supported and monitored. What staff developers learn from the study of implementation will inform decisions about future training, the need for support, and adjustments in the learning opportunities. If new content is to be learned and implemented in classrooms so that students benefit, teachers need ongoing training, the colleagueship of peers as they plan and develop lessons and materials and study their implementation, and interim measures to judge the success of their efforts.

Dimension 15: All teachers responsible for instruction are included in training and learning opportunities and collaboration.

All teachers responsible for instruction are included in training and learning opportunities and collaboration. There is an expectation that all teachers are engaged in professional learning.

A subset of faculty is included in training and learning and collaboration. There is a lack of shared responsibility across the staff to increase student achievement.

A few teachers participate in training with the intent of “training-the-trainer” without provisions for supporting the scaling up.

Professional development attendance and implementation in the classroom is optional, teachers engage on voluntary basis.

Dimension 16: Training and learning opportunities are distributed through the year.

Training and learning opportunities are distributed through the year. PD time is provided every week, using combinations of scheduling options. (Example: Early release, late start, faculty meetings, common planning time, before or after school, etc.)

Training and learning is distributed – every other week.

Training and learning opportunities are monthly or less.

In-service days are used for workdays and other non-PD uses.

Dimension 17: Training/Learning opportunities are adjusted and refined based on data.

Training and learning opportunities use a variety of formats for engaging teachers including: presentations, reading literature, small group discussion, watching live demonstrations, and viewing video tapes of demonstrations. Training/Learning opportunities are adjusted and refined based on the findings from the analysis of student data and teacher implementation data.

Training and learning opportunities are varied and include all design elements, but are not routinely adjusted and refined to address needs identified from student and teacher data.

PD is a study group format where participants discuss materials about instructional strategies. Participants discuss practices rather than see demonstrations, plan lessons together, and use implementation data to design next steps.

PD is exclusively a lecture and recitation format.

Dimension 18: Collaborative team meetings are structured.

Collaborative team meetings use structures (agenda and minutes). Teachers are provided with time to plan lessons, discuss data, solve problems, and work with materials to support the strategy being studied.

Collaborative team meetings include group dialogue to address issues of implementation. Lessons are planned in isolation.

Collaborative team meetings are informal. Teachers meet and discuss successes.

Collaborative team meetings are not routinely held.

Dimension 19: An implementation plan describes what the teachers will be studying and putting in place in the classroom.

An implementation plan describes what the teachers will be studying and putting in place in the classroom. Teachers know how often they are to implement the strategy (frequency); how they are to implement the strategy in their classroom (fidelity); and if there are different expectations for some role groups. Differing expectations are spelled out and made clear to all participants (Example: PE teachers using text less frequently will implement once every other week rather than daily.)

An implementation plan is in place. How often strategy is to be used is identified, but no information is available on fidelity and expectations.

A plan for implementation is discussed informally, but no written implementation plan has been developed.

Teachers are unclear about what is needed to get the strategy fully in place.

Dimension 20: Formative assessments are in place.

A plan is in place that describes how students will be assessed to see if they are responding to instruction that is the focus of the PD initiative (formative). The assessment aligns well with the content being presented.

Student progress is assessed but the assessments don’t align with the content being presented.

Plan suggests formative assessment procedures will be done.

Formative assessment of the PD initiative is not addressed by plan.

Dimension 21: Formative assessments are scheduled.

Formative data are collected frequently enough to shape decisions about future PD. The assessments are conducted often enough to be sensitive to changes in student learning.

Assessments are conducted too often. (Changes are not likely to be measurable because students have not had enough time to learn the skill being measured.)

Assessments are scheduled too far apart to yield data in a way that can be used to change the PD or to adjust instruction.

Formative assessments have been identified, but collection is not on a specific schedule.

Formative assessment of the PD initiative is not addressed by plan.

Dimension 22: Formative data are used to plan training and supports for students.

PD Leadership Team analyzes formative data and facilitates dialogue about the findings with staff. Data are used to plan future training and identify additional on-going supports or adjustments in instruction for students.

Data are collected and interpreted by PD Leadership Team. Data inform some decisions, but not routinely used to shape PD or change instructional practices.

Data are used for accountability, but not for planning and adjusting PD and instruction.

Limited use of formative data.

Comments/Evidence:____________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Component: Summative Evaluation
The effectiveness of professional development is judged by student learning outcomes. Determination of the efficacy of a professional development program is based on two factors: whether or not the content was implemented as planned and whether or not students acquired the desired knowledge/skills/behaviors. This judgment is based on both formative and summative evaluation data. The quality of the evaluation is contingent upon having clearly stated goals that target an improvement in student performance. A professional development program is successful when it achieves its student learning goals.

Dimension 23: Summative data are used to plan the next cycle of professional development.

Summative evaluation includes analysis ITBS/ITEDs plus other assessments including end of the year review of formative data. Teacher implementation data are considered when interpreting student results.

Summative data are used to plan the next cycle of professional development (continue as is, modify, change target, etc.).

Summative evaluation includes only ITBS/ITEDs. Data are used to judge efficacy of PD. Analysis includes tests scores, but not teacher implementation. Findings are used to make decisions about next steps.

Decisions on future PD include general findings regarding student results.

No summative plan. Decisions on future cycle of PD are based on opinions about efficacy of PD.

Dimension 24: Faculty and stakeholders are informed about the outcomes of the evaluation of professional development.

Faculty and stakeholders are informed about the outcomes of the evaluation of professional development and informed of decisions for next steps.

Faculty is informed about the outcomes and next steps. Stakeholders receive little or no information about the outcomes of professional development.

Evaluation findings are developed into a report, but are not communicated to others.

Analysis is not in a format that can be reported to faculty or stakeholders. No information is shared.

This technical assistance document was developed by the Iowa Department of Education with input from the Iowa Staff Development Council, a state affiliate of the National Staff Development Council. For additional information please contact Deb Hansen (deb.hansen@iowa.gov).

District/Building Profile

Iowa Professional Development Model

Individual Career Development Plans

The Individual Teacher Career Development Plan (ITCDP) is intended to support the professional growth of individual teachers as part of the district’s focus on increasing achievement for all students. ITCDP is based on the needs of the teacher, the Iowa Teaching Standards and Criteria, and the student achievement goals of the building and district as per the CSIP. The goals and learning opportunities established in the individual plan should be a direct fit with the district and building plans for professional development. The individual plans may be developed for a team of teachers. The format for the individual plan is locally determined.

Dimension 25: Individual Career Development Plans are in place.

Each career teacher has an individual plan that:

· was developed by teacher and administrator

· is based on the Iowa Teaching Standards

· is based on district data and goals

· is reviewed annually

Teachers that learn together in teams use team plans, as appropriate. Procedures for individual plans are clearly articulated, all teachers and administrators understand the process and recognize the connections among the evaluation process, the individual PD plans, and the District/Bldg PD plans.

Each career teacher has an individual career plan, and those who are learning in teams have plans formatted as a team plan. Teachers and administrators know the procedures for district plans, individual plans, and performance reviews, but do not recognize how these processes interact.

Procedures for individual career plans have been announced, but teachers and/or administrators are not clear about what is expected and how the processes work and interact.

Individual plans do not meet basic requirements. There is no effort to align the various plans and procedures.