An Investigation Into the Alignment of Teacher and Coach Experiences in Professional Learning

• In Event: Implementation and Effects of Curriculum-Aligned Professional Learning: A Study of Professional Learning Partnerships

Abstract

Objectives
Professional learning partnerships (PLPs) are viewed as one avenue to support successful teacher change (Penuel et al., 2015). This paper describes the approaches that seven PLPs have taken to provide high-quality professional learning (PL) experiences to teachers.

Theoretical Framework
Research on PL and coaching has identified five features that lead to teacher change and improvement in student’s academic achievement: active learning, content focus, sustained duration, coherence, and collective participation (Desimone, 2009; Penuel et al., 2015). This paper describes the nature and quality of PL regarding the first three – active learning, content focus, and duration being provided by 7 PLPs, and investigates whether there are systematic differences in the quality of PL being provided. In this analysis we describe the nature and quality of PL, and identify themes in the provision of PL across partnerships.

Data Sources and Methods
We draw on data from the teacher survey. Survey measures were adapted from previously validated scales. Data were analyzed descriptively to describe the nature and quality of professional learning, and to identify themes across the PL. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to identify systematic differences in the quality and type of PL being provided. Differences in mean scale scores by partnership were also assessed. Last, perceptions of the quality of PL were evaluated.

Findings
Our survey measures of active learning and content focus/duration asked teachers to report time spent across a number of activities (scale: 0=No time, 1=Less than 1 hour, 2=1-4 hours, 3=5-8 hours, 4=9-16 hours, 5=17-25 hours, 6=26-40 hours, 7=More than 40 hours). We found that while teachers spent a considerable time in interactive discussion (mean=3.71, SD=1.82), they spent the most time “listening to a lecture or presentation” (mean=3.81, SD=1.89), and very little time modeling or observing (see Figure 1). Regarding content focus, we found that PLPs fell into two groups, distinguished by more time in most content areas, emphasis on special populations, particularly students performing below grade-level, and their emphasis on culturally responsive teaching (see Figure 2). ANOVA showed that the teachers in Group 2 PLPs, who spent more time on most content areas, considered their PL to be significantly more valuable to their learning than other teachers.

Scholarly Significance
It is notable that in this nationwide effort to support high-quality PL, providers are still relying on lecture and not more active approaches to learning. More effort needs to be made to support PL providers in providing more engaging activities. Also, these PLPs are all in districts serving 50% or more Black or Hispanic students--yet some are still providing very little PL on special populations of students (e.g., students achieving below grade level and students designated as ELs). The field needs to provide more examples of how PL providers can work with specific district contexts to support teachers in adapting curriculum to the needs of their students, in engaging, active ways.

Authors

• Ethan Smith, University of Delaware

• Laura M. Desimone, University of Delaware

• Horatio Blackman, National Urban League