Data-Driven Professional Development: A District-Wide Initiative to Improve Literacy Teaching and Learning

• In Event: Value-Added in Arizona: Specifics, Statistics, and Impact

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to explore how student achievement data (including standardized tests, district-wide summative assessments, and ongoing formative classroom-based assessments, all of which contribute to teachers’ value-added) can be used to measure both student and teacher needs. This study explores professional development as a means of improving teacher knowledge and practice to increase student achievement and the value teachers add to student learning.

Perspectives

The national emphasis on accountability for the achievement of all students has created a sense of urgency for improving educational outcomes for students, yet a significant gap in literacy achievement remains (Lee, Grigg, & Donahue, 2007). This issue is exacerbated in high-poverty, low-performing schools. Yet while teachers work hard and are committed to improvement, they may lack the knowledge or skills necessary to move students to higher levels of engagement and achievement (Lortie, 1975; Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzalez, 1992).

Methods

Participants included district leaders, principals, and teachers engaged in a district-wide initiative to improve literacy teaching and learning in elementary schools (PreK-6). Participants engaged in a year-long iterative cycle of inquiry in which they analyzed student value-added data and developed differentiated instructional plans accordingly (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996; Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Loucks-Horsley, 1995). Observing this process enabled the researcher to unpack how strategic, data-informed professional development could substantively add value to student achievement, as well as teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions (Doyle, 1990; Guskey, 1985; 1986; 2002; Johnson, 1996).

Data sources include: (a) field notes from focus groups, teacher and district-level meetings, and professional development activities, (b) video- and audio-tape recordings of focus groups, meetings, and professional development activities, (c) transcripts from interviews with district curriculum leaders and teachers, (d) artifacts from professional development sessions, and (e) survey data. Analyses were consistent with qualitative methods using constant comparisons to develop grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), and themes were constructed from the evidence and tested through triangulation across data (Corbin & Strauss, 1990; Glaser, 1965).

 
Results

Findings suggest teachers feel empowered when they are given the opportunity to engage in a self-assessment of professional needs using data. Participants in this study had substantial experience using student data to drive instruction prior to engaging in this collaborative inquiry; however, they had never used the data to identify their own needs. By working in school teams with district-level support, participants were able to assess teachers’ professional needs (e.g., content knowledge, pedagogy, instructional planning, etc.), create strategic short- and long-term professional development plans, engage in targeted professional development, and equip teachers to more effectively move students to higher levels of engagement and achievement.

Significance

Findings from this study support the continued use of professional development that focuses on data analysis for data use. Especially with value-added initiatives abound, at the state and district-level in this case, using value-added data to improve instruction and ultimately impact student learning must be at focus, if not the primary focus, when it comes to value-added accountability.

Author

• Catherine Mary Weber, Arizona State University