Professional Development Plan

For

2007 – 2010

May 2007

Monroe #1 BOCES

Professional Development Plan

2007-2010

Vision Statement:

To develop and sustain an effective Professional Learning community at Monroe #1 BOCES using best practice in professional development. The intention of all Monroe #1 Professional Development will be to improve staff skills and competencies as evidenced by student learning outcomes.

Mission Statement

The Professional Development Committee guides the identification of appropriate professional development aimed at helping to meet the goals of the committee. This committee works with the Assistant Superintendent for Instruction and the Teacher Center Director to coordinate program offerings to faculty and staff, collect the appropriate data, perform data analysis and make recommendations to improve staff and student outcomes.

Composition of Professional Development Team:

Co-Chairs:

Mary L. Balme: Assistant Superintendent for Instruction, Monroe #1 BOCES

Virginia Gorski: Teacher Center Director and Professional Development Specialist

Cheryl Bamford: Elementary/Middle School Principal, Lois E. Bird School and Morgan

Linda Bordwell: SETRC Professional Development Specialist

Joyce Esch: Director, Career and Technical Education

Sheryl Feigenbaum: Instructional Specialist, Creekside/District Based

Anna Frank: SETRC Professional Development Specialist

JoAnn Genthner: Principal START, Alternative High School, Alternative Program

Nancy Hoskins: President, Teacher Association/ Special Education Teacher

Cynthia Lembo: Principal of Creekside School

Marty Nelson Nasca: Coordinator, Deaf/ASL Education Department

Karen Newcomb: PreSchool Teacher on Special Assignment

Joe Nicholson: Support Services

Ginny Singer: Instructional Specialist, Creekside, Alternative Education, PreSchool/ABA

Barbara Witkowski: Instructional Specialist, START Program

Cory Wright: EMCC Teacher

Susan Wyand: Instructional Specialist EMCC and Rush Campus

INTRODUCTION:

The purpose of professional development is to enhance the teaching and learning capacities of teachers in order to increase their abilities to assist all students in reaching higher academic achievement. In addition, it is to improve the quality of teaching and learning experiences by ensuring that teachers remain current with their profession and the research base surrounding both content and pedagogical practices associated with each individual disciplinary area.

As required by subsection (dd) of section 100.2 of the Regulations of the Commissioner of Education by September 1, 2000, and annually by September 1, of each school year thereafter, each school district and Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) shall adopt a Professional Development Plan (PDP). The purpose of the plan shall be to improve the quality of teaching and learning by ensuring that teachers participate in substantial professional development programs in order to remain current with their profession and meet the learning needs of their students.

The ultimate goal of all efforts in this area is to increase the capacity of teachers to enable and assist all students to higher academic achievement. Enhanced teaching and learning is the foundation upon which individual districts should plan the content of all professional development.

Summary of 2006-2007 Professional Development Plan:

The ultimate worth of professional development for teachers is the essential role it plays in the improvement of student learning. Educators must pay attention to the results of professional development on job performance, organizational effectiveness and the success of all students. All of our professional development effort should be accompanied by an evaluation plan for determining its effectiveness.

Across our programs and departments, professional development activities were designed to meet the needs of our staff for the 2006 – 2007 school year (See Monroe #1 PDP Activities 06-07). Our Professional Development Committee met in the Spring to summarize activities during this school year, and to reflect on PD practices, utilizing the Quality Indicators Tool, adapted from NYSED. Programs and departments looked at the quality of Professional Development planning, content, design, climate, implementation and evaluation during this school year, and compared that with last year’s review (Compare June 06 with June 07 pp. 6 and 7).

As a committee, it was determined that practices moved from “fair” to “good” across many of the components of the Quality Indicator rubric. It is our intention to promote best practices in school-improvement by focusing on the evaluation component of Professional Development in the upcoming plan for 2007-2010. Our focus will be to improve the quality of our programs and their overall effectiveness through high quality professional development throughout our Monroe #1 BOCES organization.

Professional Development Quality Indicators

Status of Monroe #1 BOCES Professional Development - June 2006

Quality Indicators High Success Good Fair Low Success

Planning / Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in the development of long range (unified) professional development plans with identification of expected results / Group planning process identifies defined results that will impact students or staff / Planning process developed by one person / Superficial or no plan developed; training and topics selected as needed. Individual staff members seek out staff development on their own.
Content / Content, skills, knowledge based on research and relevant to program needs and associated with attainment of student results / Content based on research and program needs; not associated with attainment of student results / Research or regulation driven; not linked to student performance outcomes / No obvious relationship of training to program needs or improvement
Design / Uses a variety of delivery systems, presentational models and techniques to meet the needs of staff over a period of time / Professional development is designed with a variety of formats to provide some opportunity to expand on topics / Regionalized training; menu approach to selection / Single presentation using limited presentation models, often to fill available time slot; one time training
Climate/ Culture / Mutual respect and collaboration at all levels, professional development recognized as a powerful change agent / Professional development is valued as a vehicle for change, but not well integrated across all levels of organization / Professional development is inconsistently encouraged (driven by each program) / Professional development is not encouraged; mandatory participation required on selected topics
Implementation / Long term and continual follow up opportunities for participants to practice skills and methodology are planned to include ongoing coaching and/or turnkey training. Strong evidence of administrative support to continue with follow up activities / Follow-up activities (technical assistance, discussion, participant sharing etc.) are encouraged across each program. / Follow up is occasional and informal; technical support may occur, but without facilitation to monitor and refine skills / No follow up is provided; very limited opportunities planned for follow up with participants
Evaluation / Ongoing data collection and analysis linked to predetermined student results. Outcomes are consistent with professional development plans and goals. All stakeholders are involved with evaluation and ongoing planning. / Student and staff outcomes are evaluated in relation to professional development planning. / Professional development evaluations are based on numbers attending and participant reaction to sessions and activities / No evaluation conducted

Professional Development Quality Indicators

Status of Monroe #1 BOCES Professional Development - June 2007

Quality Indicators High Success Good Fair Low Success

Planning / Meaningful participation of all stakeholders in the development of long range (unified) professional development plans with identification of expected results / Group planning process identifies defined results that will impact students or staff / Planning process developed by one person / Superficial or no plan developed; training and topics selected as needed. Individual staff members seek out staff development on their own.
Content / Content, skills, knowledge based on research and relevant to program needs and associated with attainment of student results / Content based on research and program needs; not associated with attainment of student results / Research or regulation driven; not linked to student performance outcomes / No obvious relationship of training to program needs or improvement
Design / Uses a variety of delivery systems, presentational models and techniques to meet the needs of staff over a period of time / Professional development is designed with a variety of formats to provide some opportunity to expand on topics / Regionalized training; menu approach to selection / Single presentation using limited presentation models, often to fill available time slot; one time training
Climate/ Culture / Mutual respect and collaboration at all levels, professional development recognized as a powerful change agent / Professional development is valued as a vehicle for change, but not well integrated across all levels of organization / Professional development is inconsistently encouraged (driven by each program) / Professional development is not encouraged; mandatory participation required on selected topics
Implementation / Long term and continual follow up opportunities for participants to practice skills and methodology are planned to include ongoing coaching and/or turnkey training. Strong evidence of administrative support to continue with follow up activities / Follow-up activities (technical assistance, discussion, participant sharing etc.) are encouraged across each program. / Follow up is occasional and informal; technical support may occur, but without facilitation to monitor and refine skills / No follow up is provided; very limited opportunities planned for follow up with participants
Evaluation / Ongoing data collection and analysis linked to predetermined student results. Outcomes are consistent with professional development plans and goals. All stakeholders are involved with evaluation and ongoing planning. / Student and staff outcomes are evaluated in relation to professional development planning
*Process is beginning with some programs/ departments / Professional development evaluations are based on numbers attending and participant reaction to sessions and activities / No evaluation conducted

Professional Development Plan 2007 - 2008

Using Multiple Measures of Data

The Goal for Professional Development plan for 2007-08 is: Monroe #1 staff will utilize multiple measures of data to improve instructional practices, student learning and/or behaviors. In order to move our professional development practices from GOOD to HIGH LEVELS of success across our programs and departments, multiple measures of data and evaluation will be used to provide a powerful picture of this learning organization.

One of the most articulate experts advocating the use of multiple measures and examining data intersections is Victoria Bernhardt, California State University’s executive director of the Education for the Future Initiative and author of numerous books on using school data, including Data Analysis for Comprehensive School-wide Improvement (Eye on Education, 1998). Bernhardt recommends that to make good decisions, educators should look at four categories of data:

·  Demographic data, provides descriptive information on items such as enrollment, attendance, grade level, ethnicity, gender, home background, and language proficiency

·  Student learning data, describes an educational system in terms of standardized test results, grade point averages, standard assessments, and other formal assessments

·  Perceptual data, helps to understand what students, parents, teachers, and others think about the learning environment. Perceptions are important since people act based on what they believe

·  School process data, refers to programs, instructional strategies, and classroom practices. This measure seems to be hardest to describe, yet it is the one type of data that’s most readily available to document. School processes include the instructional

and assessment strategies we use and programs we offer. This data is critical for understanding how we get the results we are

getting.

Professional Development planning will incorporate the use of evaluative measures across each of these categories. Examples of data may include: classroom based assessments, progress monitoring measures, questionnaires distributed at the end of training events, samples of rubrics that teams have designed, minutes of team meetings, weekly logs kept by mentors, observational data from walk-through visits to classrooms, portfolios, parent surveys, and/or behavioral logs. The intention is to promote the understanding and use of available data (formal and informal) to help staff determine if they are achieving their purpose, if they are meeting the needs of all students and to guide instructional practices across our programs and departments.

All instructional programs will develop objectives and activities that will support the goal of this plan from May – October 2007. The Professional Team will meet and work with our departments on these efforts.

Monroe #1 BOCES Professional Development Plan

07-08

Goal: (what measurable outcome or desired state are we trying to create? What will happen as a result of this Professional Development Plan?)
Monroe #1 Staff will utilize multiple measures of data to improve instructional practices, student learning and/or behaviors * as evidenced by moving to high success across Professional Development Quality Indicator Rubric
Objective: (what will educators learn or be able to do to increase staff or student outcomes through this Professional Development Plan)?
Anticipated Outcomes (one or both)
Activity Supporting Goal of his Plan /

Data to be Collected

/ Change to Systems and/or Practices / Change to Student Outcome / Actual Outcomes to be reported midyear and at the end of the year

Department or Program______

Mentoring New Teachers:

In compliance with the revised teacher certification requirements that became effective February 2, 2004, which call for a completion of a mentored experience during the first year of teaching, each district and BOCES must develop a plan for mentoring new teachers. The description of the mentoring program must be part of the district’s Professional Development Plan.

The purpose of the Monroe 1 BOCES mentor program is to provide support for new teachers in order to ease the transition form teacher preparation to practice, increase the retention of the new teacher and increase skills of new teachers to improve student achievement. The mentor plan is described in previous Professional Development Plans and continues to include:

·  Procedures for selecting mentors by a board composed of 51% teachers

·  Guidelines for the mentor’s role to be confidential, supportive and non evaluative.

·  Administrative support assisting with release time for common planning, observation, workshops and conferencing. Administrators respect mentor/intern confidentiality and take responsibility for supervision and evaluation.

·  Mentor training, through the Monroe “1 BOCES Teacher Center, including: mentoring communication, adult learning theory, the conference/observation cycle, goal setting and the stages of new teacher growth.

·  Mentor led on-the-job professional development intended to apply theory to practice. Mentors and new teachers work together in each other’s classrooms using the pre-conference, observation, conference, reflection and goal setting process.