Evaluating state-provided professional learning

• In SREB’s study, just five of the fourteen states — Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee —published or commissioned evaluations of major state professional learning initiatives in 2014-15 or 2015-16, that examined changes in teacher knowledge and practice or student outcomes. Of these states, Kentucky has also gone the furthest to organize staff in the SEA to make evaluation a priority in the agency’s work. A dedicated delivery unit builds the agency’s capacity in project management and data-driven decision-making. For each priority in the SEA’s strategic plan, the unit develops and leads implementation of an evaluation plan. Unit staff members also participate in cross-functional teams to integrate data analysis into the agency’s overall strategic planning process.

• Some examples from LF’s work nationally on who is doing this work well, and what it takes to get it done? Especially re: how states are getting technical expertise, time and staff capacity for conducting evaluation, and how states secure enough funding to do this extensive work?

• All of these strong efforts share some common threads. … and here we can lay out the things behind the work, the things the SEA/state leaders did that readers should take from the examples

​Supporting comprehensive evaluation of professional learning at the local level

Guidance and tools

• Four states in SREB’s study — Delaware, Florida, Kentucky and Maryland — provided more on-demand guidance and tools to support local leaders with the evaluation of professional learning than did the other states in the study. The following tools in particular stood out: Delaware’s Documenting Progress through Evidence guide and Common Ground for the Common Core Evidence Placemat; Florida’s Professional Developme nt System Evaluation Protocol; Kentucky’s Guide for Evaluating the Impact of Professional Development and Reflection Tools; and Maryland’s Teacher Professional Development Evaluation Guide.

• Examples from Learning Forward—state work. And I wonder if you even have complementary examples of local districts or schools that used the state supports to rigorously evaluate local professional learning? We did not go into that detail for our benchmarking reports.

• All of these strong efforts share some common threads. … and here we can lay out the things behind the work, the things the SEA/state leaders did that readers should take from the examples

Professional learning and technical assistance

• Five of the 15 states in SREB’s study — Alabama, Delaware, Kentucky, Louisiana and North Carolina — provided in-depth, long-term professional learning to significant numbers of district or school leadership teams, complemented by regular technical assistance to support implementation of knowledge, skills and practices learned. Two of these states’ efforts are described below.

• In Alabama, since 2011, all 136 districts have designated an implementation team made up of teachers (English language arts, math, science, social studies, career and technical education, special education and English learner education), library and media specialists, and school and district leaders. The teams meet quarterly with the SEA to participate in learning sessions and receive technical assistance to support implementation of the Alabama College- & Career-Ready Standards and redelivery of the training at their local sites. In 2015-16, based on feedback from participants, the SEA shifted the design of the quarterly meetings from statewide meetings based on uniform content to regional meetings based on differentiated content to meet local needs. In 2015-16, the SEA also designed the meetings to focus more on evaluating quality, helping the teams build their skills to monitor implementation of the professional learning they implement locally.

• In Delaware, since 2013-14, school and district guiding teams (including teachers, principals and district staff) in the SEA’s Common Ground for the Common Core program have participated in an annual cycle of pre-reading, data collection and three-day learning institutes. These learning activities are supplemented by regular technical assistance such as school-based planning clinics, meetings to share evidence of progress and plan improvements and virtual coaching. This assistance supports implementation of the standards and the professional learning that the teams lead locally. In 2015- 16, teams have been focusing their learning and improvement efforts on one of two areas: closing achievement gaps for students with disabilities and English learners, or deepening literacy practices across the content areas. Since 2013-14, 136 of the state’s 225 schools and 18 out of 19 districts have participated. In 2013-14, 100 schools participated, followed by 80 in 2014-15 and 40 in 2015-16.

• Some examples from LF’s work nationally on who is doing this work well, and what it takes to get it done?

• All of these strong efforts share some common threads. … and here we can lay out the things behind the work, the things the SEA/state leaders did that readers should take from the examples

​Increasing shared accountability for excellence in professional learning between state and local leaders

Feedback

• In just five of the 15 states in SREB’s study ― Alabama, Delaware, Kentucky, Louisiana and North Carolina ― SEA staff members (or RESA staff, in coordination with the SEA) provided in-depth feedback to local leaders on their professional learning practice through regular, face-to-face meetings and virtual sessions with local leadership teams participating in the SEA professional learning program, and also through site visits. In Alabama and Delaware in particular, much of this feedback focused on assisting the district or school teams’ efforts to monitor and evaluate the professional learning they delivered at their local sites. [Don’t know if I should really describe in more detail each state’s efforts?]

• Some examples from LF’s work nationally on who is doing this work well, and what it takes to get it done?

• All of these strong efforts share some common threads. … and here we can lay out the things behind the work, the things the SEA/state leaders did that readers should take from the examples

​

Expecting comprehensive evaluation of local professional learning to inform continuous improvement

• I need some help with this section! At this time I do not have much to say here regarding highlights of states in our study that required that state-funded programs with professional learning as a major component conducted — and reported findings from — comprehensive evaluation of the professional learning. We did not go into this level of detail in our benchmarking research. I think all federal funding streams require a certain amount of the funding to go to program evaluation, but our benchmarking study did not go into detail on the extent to which the SEAs used their oversight role to hold districts and schools accountable for comprehensive evaluations of professional learning conducted with federal funds.