DeterminingThe Professional Development Components Factors For The Agricultural-Jihad Trainers In Iranian Training Centers

Poster Session

Shahpasand, Mohammad. R.;

Abstract

The present study focuses on determiningtheProfessional Development Components factors of the Trainers in Iranian Agricultural-jihad Training Centers.Research method was descriptive-correlation and also data gathering instrument was researcher made questionnaire. The validity (authorities view) and reliability (Cronbach’s  coefficient) after designing were assessed. The population survey consisted of all trainers of Agricultural Jihad Training Centers (N= 490). Sample quantity was 110 people which were obtained by Cocran formula and variance calculation. Based on mean results the view of trainers in all component of PD was in a satisfactory level. In addition factor analysis for process show five factors with nearly 61% variance. These factors were: New learning based on prior experiences, Implementing of educational feedback on process designing, Participating methods usage, Diversity process usage and Individual methods implementation. The result also showed eight factors for the PD content that accounted for 61% of the total variance. These factors were: Communication: its role in education, Individual differences, Information and communication technology, Providing convenience educational environment, Human growth and development, Subject matter knowledge, Family partnership in learning and Evaluation methods .Finally the result showed six factors for PD context that accounted for 57% of the total variance. These factors were: PD as a continuous process and section of educational system, Allocated resources and inputs for PD, Flexible management, Availability the inputs and educational opportunity, Participatory management and utilizing from the staff abilityand Systematic PD in center's structure.

Keywords:Professional development, PD process, PDcontent, PD context, Agricultural trainers,Agricultural-jihad Training Centers.

Introduction

In recent years, teachers’Professional development has been paid high attention by researchers who studied in human development. Over the past two decades there have been significant shifts in the knowledge base about how teacherslearn, including effective models and strategies for professional development (Hawley & Valli, 1999; Ball & Cohen, 1999). This knowledge has led to many positive shifts both in beliefs and practices.PDof teachers is a crucial element of the governments’ efforts to improve education.

One of the vital problems in each educational system is providing teachers who have enough empowerment in teaching. In the ministry of Agricultural Jihad in Iran,providing teachers is being done in the deputy of Manpower.Teachers were employed according to the technical knowledge in agriculture, and also they may have little knowledge in educational skills, and can not be professional teachers. Therefore the deputy of Manpower should teach them the educational skills.

Improving student achievement has always been at the forefront of majoreducational reform movements (Dilworth & Imig, 1995; Goals 2000, 2001). Theacademic success of students can be significantly affected by teachers’ access andparticipation in quality PD activities (Darling-Hammond, 1990;Gurskey, 2002).“The imperative for professionals, policymakers and the public at large torecognize that performance–based accountability, if it is to do what it wasintended to do–improve the quality of educational experience for allstudents and increase the performance of schools–requires a strategy forinvesting in the knowledge and skill of educators.” (Elmore, 2002).

“More often than not, PD for teachers is fragmented andincoherent, lacks of intellectual rigor, fails to build on existing knowledge and skills anddoes little to assist them with the day-to-day challenges of improving student learning”(Sparks, 2002, p. 9-1). Much of the current research on PD suggests thatcurrent models of professional development are ineffective (Cohen & Hill, 1998; Wang,Frechtling, & Sanders, 1999). The goal of improving teaching can best be met bymoving educators away from the view that teaching is an isolated event. In order forteaching to improve, teachers must begin to evaluate their work and examine theirprofessional practices (Heibert, Gallimore, & Stigler, 2004).

The fundamental problem has been that for the purpose of teacher'sPD, what kind of content, during which process and what context are received by the teachers. Responding to this question can be manual for planners. By attending to importance of teachers in educational system and their PD, determining the PD components is essential. This paper introduces the PDC to managers, so that they design a suitable plan for teachers. The aim of the current study was to determine theProfessional Development Components factors of the Trainers in Iranian Agricultural-jihad Training Centers.

Theoretical framework

Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1996) define professionaldevelopment as “deepening teachers’ understanding about the teaching/learning process and the students they teach,”which“must begin withpre-service education and continue throughout a teacher’s career.”Theystate that “effective professional development involves teachers both aslearners and teachers, and allows them to struggle with the uncertaintiesthat accompany each role”.

Rollins (2003) stated that PD is a continuous process for teachers, managers and other staffs of educational institute. Professional development helps to the teachers for skills achievements and knowledge improvement for teaching. PD ensures that staffs of educational institute gain the skills and competency for teaching the learners (Wisconsin department of public instruction, 2003).

PD has several components that could be organized in three sections. (Michigan state board of Education, 2003; Schiff, et al, 1997; Ferriere, et al, 1997; Rollins, 2003; Maryland Department of education, 2005; Guskey, & Sparks, 1996).

a)Context characteristics. Context characteristics address the organizationand the nature of the system in which change will occur. Context characteristics refer to the “when,” “where,” and “why” of professional development. They are the underpinnings – the system foundation – upon which professional development occurs. How do we work toward an environment (culture, norms,policies, roles, relationships) that supports adultlearning for increased student achievement? (Schiff, et al. 1997).They involve the organization, system, or culture in which PD takes place and where the new understandings will be implemented. An important part of the context, for example, may be the pressure created by a district's high expectations for the learning of all students. (Guskey & Huberman, 1995).

Context factors impact the success of PD activities. Questions toguide the evaluation of context factors include:What actions demonstrate the extent of the faculty’s shared responsibility forlearning?How and when is time provided for professional development activities?What PD resources are available to teachers? And how do teachers get feedback on their performance and implementation?(Rollins,D.H,2003).

b)Process variables. Process variables refer to the “how” of PD.Process variables are the ways activities are planned, organized, carriedout, and followed up. They are the ways new learning occurs. How do we design, deliver and evaluate effectiveprofessional development focused on best practices? (Schiff, et al. 1997). They concern to the type and forms of PD activities (Sparks & Loucks-Horsley, 1989). Most of the writing on the PD quality and most PD research focuses on these variables. Examples include the quality of training and the value of sustained follow-up activities such as coaching, action research, or focused study groups (Joyce & Showers, 1995; Loucks-Horsley et al., 1987; Louis & Miles, 1990).Process standards describing the learningprocesses used in the acquisition of new knowledge and skills. Process involves the useof data, evaluation, and research. Questions to guide the evaluation of process include:Were all stakeholder groups involved in the planning of this PD– the planning of content, implementation, evaluation, etc.? And were multiple data sets reviewed to identify needs, select content, plan delivery,evaluate practices, etc.? (Rollins,D.H,2003).

c)Content characteristics. Content characteristics are the “what” of PD. These characteristics are primarily the new knowledge,skills, and understandings that are the foundation of academic disciplines and pedagogical processes. What do educators, need to know and be able todo to ensure that all students and all pre-service teachersare proficient? Educators must be gained the content through the professional development. Quality PD is a dynamic and fluid process. If appropriatestructures are in place (context), a variety of best practices (processes) areused,and appropriate knowledge and skill acquisition are occurring (content),then PD will impact student achievement (Schiff, et al. 1997). Content may include a deeper understanding of specific academic disciplines as well as particular pedagogical processes. As our knowledge base in education expands, practitioners need new types of expertise. PD helps educators keep abreast of this emerging knowledge base so they can continually refine their conceptual and craft skills (Guskey & Huberman, 1995). Content characteristics also include aspects relating to the magnitude, scope, credibility, and practicality of the change required to implement this new knowledge (Doyle & Ponder, 1977; Fullan, 1991). Crandall, Eisemann, and Louis (1986), for example, argue that the greatest success in PD is likely when the size of the advocated change is not so massive that typical users find it necessary to adopt a coping strategy that seriously distorts the change, but large enough to require noticeable, sustained effort. Asking teachers or administrators to change too many things too rapidly also may result in maintenance of the status quo. (Rollins,D.H, 2003).

Evaluating content involves a review of the research evidence that supports the contentof a program or innovation. The content of PD should beresearch-based, relevant to the needs of the participants, and compatible with otherexisting practices and philosophies. Student needs and teacher needs should not beoverlooked when evaluating content. Questions to guide the evaluation of contentinclude:What results have been achieved when this program content was implementedwith students similar (age, gender, socioeconomic status, intellect, etc.) to ours?What are the points of agreement between this program/practice and ourbeliefs, practices, policies, etc.? And what specific student/teacher need(s) does this program content address? (Rollins,D.H, 2003).

Although we have a common professional knowledge base in education and certain PD principles are universal, most content and processes must be adapted, at least in part, to the unique characteristics of the setting (Firestone & Corbett, 1987; Fullan, 1985; Huberman & Miles, 1984). Teaching and learning are complex endeavors embedded in highly diverse contexts. PD efforts succeed to the degree that they can adapt to and capitalize on this variability (Guskey, 1994). In other words, they must be shaped and integrated in ways that best suit regional, organizational, and individual contexts: the local values, norms, policies, structures, resources, and procedures (McLaughlin, 1990; Talbert, McLaughlin, & Rowan, 1993).

Content characteristics, process variables, and context characteristics are all important in determining the quality of PD. These three dimensions also form the conceptual framework of the recently developed Standards for PD. Neglecting any one of these dimensions can significantly diminish the effectiveness of staff development and drastically reduce the likelihood of improvement in student learning (Rollins, D.H, 2003).

Teachers will be intended to PD if PDenhances their educational knowledge and skills (The Alliance Education, 2005), but due to the inconvenient length of course, scientific level and lack of the convincing result's research, the PD activitiesare unsatisfying(Sullivan, B., 1999). Also the PD content is incoherent to educational institute mission(Laine, S. W. M., & Otto, C. ,2000).

2. Method

2.1. Participants

Research method was descriptive-correlation and also data gathering instrument has beenresearcher made questionnaire. The population survey consisted all trainers of Agricultural Jihad Training Centers (N= 490).The teachers in this study were sampled from a classified random sample of centers located in Iran. The statistical population consisted of 490 teachers in 64 agriculture centers. Sample quantity was 110 people which selected based on classified random sampling; regarding the qualification of trainers training the Agricultural-jihad Centers were classified into three levels, A, B, C, by the Institute of Technical & Vocational Higher Education(Anonymous, 2005). The 110 questionnaires were sent to teachers out of which 107 filled questionnaires were investigated and analyzed.

2.2. Research instrument

Regarding an extensive review of the literature and related instruments, the questionnaire used for this study was designed by the researcher to collect information pertinent to the research objectives. A researcher made questionnaire, combining five Likert scales measuring professional development component (PDC), was send in 2006 to teachers in 64 agricultural training centers. The respondents were asked to refer to their current center, and to answer a range of questions about their feelings ofPDC in centers. Professional development components were measured using the center Participant Professional developmentvariables.In order to measure any of components, several variables were utilized. Components were measured on a 5-point scale (scored from 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree).

Professional development content assessment variables include: communication effects in teaching and learning, convenience educational environment effect on learning, new ideas acquisition demand in subject matter knowledge, directional learning activities, effect of friendly cooperation in suitable environment learning, cognition of the basic conceptual subject matter knowledge, cognition of communication principles in teaching, effect of class participatory in learners' commitment, educational methods improvement, understanding of subject matter knowledge with other majors,domination in technical problem solving of subject matter knowledge,cognition of skills achievement circumstances,educational designing based on learners' knowledge priority, reforming the environment and educational materials, utilizing of different systems for evaluating learners performance, utilizing of individual experiences,teaching based on particular needs and ages of learners,evaluating based on behavior objectives, cognition of communication principles with learners, principles and strategies of effective class management cognition, educational designing based on learners' need, diverse educational methods based on learners' differences,cognition of knowledge formation in learners' speculation,continuous evaluation, specialized resources access for educational designing, effect of learners' priority on education,utilizing of participatory for increasing learning, cognition of learner's ability development process, teaching based on learners' differences, cognition of communication principles,effect of family participation in teaching and learning, center's interaction in between learners family in quality of education, proficiency in computer, proficiency in major's informatics, cognition of communication methods, teaching based on learners' social differences, deep conception in subject matter knowledge,evaluation's methods: advantages and limitations, cognition of evaluation's methods,knowledge in the field of individual educating programs implementation, proficiency in worldwide networks, receiving and sending information via the net, teaching based on learner's social status,learner's family participation in the needs determining, and electronically lessons implementation (Librera,L,W. et al,.2004; Munot. J. P,.1990; Maryland, Department of Education, 2005; Newcamb. L. H et al,.1986;Douglas,H. & Kelli,T. & Frances,L, 2003; -Doyle, W. & Ponder, G. 1977; -Fullan, M. G. 1991;Guskey, T. R., & Huberman, M. (Eds.). 1995; Place,N.T. & Jacob,S. 2001; Singletary, L. & et al., 2004; Sparks, D. 1994 ;King.B, 2004; Luppescu, S & Hart, H, 2005;Guskey, T. R & Sparks, D, 1996; Arkansas, Department of Education, 2005; Gold .N & et al, 2001;Skinner, N. & et al. 2005; Villegas-Reimers, E & Reimers, F, 2000; Sandra. C, S. & et al. 2006; Schiff, S. & et al. 1997; The Alliance Education, 2005; Guarino, A .J. et al. 2000;Colorado Education Goals Panel, 1996; Ferriere, T. et al. 1997; Rollins, D. H, 2003; Pikulski, J.J. 2000;Wisconsin, Department of Public Instruction, 2003;Darling-Hammond, L. 1997; Bredeson ,p & Scribner, P, J. 2000; Sullivan, B. 1999).

Professional development context assessment variables include:Provide time for participation by managers, certification awarding resulted from educational programs,managers inspire individual and communicational experimentation, specialized teacher's usage in PD, demonstrating learner's achievement in diverse methods, PD is seen as an opportunity for individual growth and organizational improvement, prominent experiences presentation by PD, coordinating and equity in resources distribution for centers, educational opportunity output presentation by the yearly calendar, Ongoing PDis embedded in the structure and goals of educational centers, manager's leadership role in educational program designing and executing, teaching enforcement as a part of educational system by the manager, the plan makes explicit the classroom changes that will take place to increase student achievement, there is an action plan for each year, professional development support the priority initiatives of centers, professional development expenditures are tied to student achievement goals, Funds are clearly allocated for PD, Integrating PD in teaching and learning, Leadership is shared in PD, PD based on needs and related goals, Sharing educational management between educators and assistants, learning as a continuous process, expertise “within the room” is acknowledged and utilized effectively, appropriate human and material resources are available for professional development and its application in the classroom, Managers value for PD, appropriate places are available for both the professional development experience and the ongoing application of the new practices, sufficient motivation for educational experts,Existing clearly policies to support from PD, Does the process value dialogue, conversation, inquiry, and self study, and the system as a whole use resources including time, space, and staff to support professional development(Guarino, A. J. et al. 2000;Puckett, P.A & Bragg, D. 2000; King. B, 2004; Luppescu, S. & Hart, H. 2005; Guskey, T. R., & Sparks, D, 1996; Arkansas Department of Education, 2005; Gold .N. & et al. 2001; Browne, D. L., & Ritchie, D. C. 1991; Skinner, N. & etal, 2005; Kimmel, H., Deek, F. P., Farrell, M. L., & O’Shea, M. 1999; Persky, S. E. 1990; Villegas-Reimers, E & Reimers, F. 2000; Sandra C. S,. et al. 2006; Schiff, S. et al, 1997; Hawley, W.D. & Valli, L. 1999; Kent, A,. M. 2004; Elmore, R. 2002; Adger, C. T., & Peyton, J. 1999; Tylee ،J. 2005; Colorado Education Goals Panel. 1996; Ferriere, T. et al. 1997; Maryland Department of education, 2005; Rollins, D.H. 2003; Smylie, M. A. 1996; Wisconsin, Department of Public Instruction, 2003; Jones, 2003).

Professional development process assessment variables include: impact the changing methods on suitable learning result, site-based, and hands-on, the effect of educational output on teachers and learning effectiveness, the process reflects best available research and practice regarding, student learning and teaching, need assessment result utilizing, ٍٍencourage educators to construct their own understanding about scientific principals, enthusiasm of teacher's perceptions alterations, the process integrates new learning with established practices, the process values dialogue, conversation, inquiry, and self study, the process include follow-up and support for changing practice, participant are satisfaction and engagement used to make short-term adjustments, utilizing group methods in PD, utilizing of internal teachers for PD, PD provides choice and differentiated learning opportunities for educators, discussing with teachers about the conceived ideas in scientific resources, utilizing of the teachers performance and the learners growth in evaluation, managers recommend the teacher's communication in the field of learning development, utilizing from diverse teacher's updating methods, alterations and new experiences prediction in PD process, alterations prediction via the instruments, manager's controlling on the learner's activities, utilizing of the individual methods, continuous feedback from learner's achievement, gathering data results distribution in wide range, understandable and clear explanation of the educational results, manager's distinguishing of the progressive teachers, learner's achievement usage in educational designing, assessment instruments coherency with diverse needs, educators are encouraged to reach beyond their, own communities to make connections with other professionals, collaboration and shared decision making are key components of the system, and educators are encouraged to take risks and provided opportunities for experimentation(Sandra Centeio, S,. et al. 2006; Rollins, D.H. 2003; Ferriere, T. et al. 1997; Arkansas Department of Education, 2005; Maryland Department of education, 2005; Schiff, S. et al, 1997; Joyce, B. & Showers, B., 1995; Louis, K. S., & Miles, M. B. 1990; Colorado Education Goals Panel., 1996; Guskey, T. R., & Sparks, D, 1996; Michigan state board of education, 2003).