PA. 201p. - ERICmust become active members of these communities, committed to the search for more...

ED 416 197

TITLE

INSTITUTION

SPONS AGENCY

PUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPEEDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

SP 037 768

Policies and Programs for Professional Development ofTeachers: Profiles of the States.Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Philadelphia,PA.

Carnegie Corp. of New York, NY.; Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC.1996-00-00201p.

Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Graduate Schoolof Education, University of Pennsylvania, 3440 MarketStreet, Suite 560, Philadelphia, PA 19104-3325.Reports Descriptive (141)MF01/PC09 Plus Postage.Educational Finance; Educational Policy; Elementary SchoolTeachers; Elementary Secondary Education; *FacultyDevelopment; Financial Support; Inservice Teacher Education;Policy Formation; Secondary School Teachers; StateGovernment; State Programs; *State Standards; TeacherCertification; *Teacher Improvement

These profiles are a product of a 50-state study of stateteacher professional development policies and programs for teachers conductedby the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The primary purpose ofthe work is to provide an information base for state policymakers interestedin improving teacher learning opportunities in their states. An accompanyingreport discusses the state of professional development for teachers and thestates' roles in professional development, and it provides information onstate initiatives, state requirements, state funding, induction programs, andstate incentives as of 1996. Each state profile lists the number of teachers,average years of experience for teachers, percentage of teachers holdingMaster's degrees, and average teacher salary. Each profile providesinformation on the following topics: (1) education policy context; (2) thestate role in professional development (teacher certification policies,state-supported programs, and federal- or foundation-supported programs); (3)

public funding for professional development (state, federal, and localfunds); (4) impact of state policies on local professional development; (5)

teacher compensation for professional development; (6) other professionaldevelopment opportunities; (7) contacts/information resources; (8)

publications and reports; and (9) ordering information. (SM)

********************************************************4************************ Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *

* from the original document. *

********************************************************************************

Consortium for PolicyResearch in Education

University ofPennsylvania

Harvard University

Stanford University

University of Michigan

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Policies and Programs forProfessional Development

of Teachers:

Profiles of the States

These profiles are a product of a 50-state study of teacherprofessional development conducted by the Consortiumfor Policy Research in Education. The study and result-ing publications were supported by a grant from theCarnegie Corporation of New York. Additional supporthas been provided by the National Institute on Educa-tional Governance, Finance, Policymaking and Manage-ment, Office of Educational Research and Improvement,U.S. Department of Education.

Consortium for Policy Research in EducationUniversity of Pennsylvania

Graduate School of EducationU.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Educational Research and ImprovementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION

CENTER (ERIC)This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.

Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

2BEST COPY AVAILABLE

le 2

It

4

I.

MI6

These profiles are a product of a 50-state study of state professional development policies and programs forteachers conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study, profiles and other publicationswere supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support was provided by theNational Institute on Educational Governance, Finance, Policymaking and Management in the Office of EducationalResearch and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.

The primary purpose of this work is to provide an information base for state policymakers interested inimproving teacher learning opportunities in their states. The profiles may be useful for stimulating discussion aboutprofessional development within a state. Policymakers may also find it useful to examine how other states are meetingthis critical need.

The State of Professional Development for Teachers

The professional development opportunities available in most school districts in the United States havelimited effects on the practice of teaching and on student outcomes. The primary reasons include:

There is generally no follow-up to in-service activities (with the exception of some induction programs forbeginning teachers) to help teachers use new practices in their classrooms.

The links between in-service content and teachers' needs are weak, as are the links between one in-serviceactivity and the next, between in-service and supervision, and between teachers' work assignments and thecourses they take. There is typically poor alignment and coordination throughout the system.

The quality of professional learning environments is low: they lack intensity, are of short duration, and seldomprovide opportunities for observation, practice, and feedback. There are generally no standards for districtprograms or for offerings of other professional development providers.

Too little attention is given to teachers' subject-matter knowledge, especially that of elementary teacherswhich is critical to raising academic standards. If content is addressed, the implications for pedagogy areseldom addressed at the same time.

Current professional development policies are ineffective and expensive. Most districts have no idea whatthey spend on professional development because funds are fragmented across budget categories. Consequently, wedo not have good data on how much is spent. Studies of individual districts indicate that they spend two to fourpercent of their budgets on professional development. When the present value of future salary increments awardedfor educational attainments is included, this amount increases to three to seven percent of their school budgets. Salaryincrements represent 60 percent ofthe total amount spent on professional development in some districts. In addition,teachers also spend considerable amounts of their own money to enhance their knowledge and skills.

3

There are exceptions to this dreary scenario. Some districts have well-designed staff development programsthat are focused and provide continuity. There are new partnerships developing between universities and districtsthat show promise, and there are some promising networks of teachers working together. But these are exceptionsto the generally low-demand, fragmented array of workshops and conferences.

The Need for Improved Professional Development

Teaching is becoming a more complex and difficult task at the same time that public expectations aboutstudent performance are rising. Teachers are being asked to teach to higher academic standards and to help studentsattain deeper understanding of content. They are being asked to help all students, not just the academically motivated,reach these standards. Students are more diverse culturally, linguistically, and in their learning styles. Students withspecial learning needs are being included in regular classrooms, and other kinds of tracking are being reduced.Teachers are being asked to take on new roles and responsibilities within restructured schools involving governance,planning, staff development, mentoring, curriculum development, assessment, and counseling.

The norms of good instructional practice are also changing. Inquiry-based instruction, cooperativelearning, interdisciplinary connections, use of technology, and more rigorous and technically adequate assessmentare now seen as hallmarks of good teaching. These new norms are being institutionalized through the adoption ofstandards of practice for initial licensing and board certification.

To meet these challenges, schools must change, and teachers must change. Schools cannot succeed ifteachers continue to work alone in the isolation of their classrooms. Schools must become communities ofpractitioners who work together to improve their practice and to help their students meet high standards. Teachersmust become active members of these communities, committed to the search for more effective practices. Newnorms of cooperative diagnosis, reflection, and improvement must replace the conventions of isolated practice.Knowledge drawn from research and practice must be integrated, codified, and taken more seriously as a basis fclimproving practice.

To make these changes, teachers must not only improve their content knowledge and their teachingskills, but change the norms and attitudes governing their practice. Meeting these challenges will require richeropportunities for growth than those now provided for most teachers. They need time with their colleagues to examinetheir teaching and to revise curriculum. They need time to learn and practice new approaches, and they need trainingto prepare for the new responsibilities being thrust upon them. All of these activities fall under the general headingof professional development.

The Role of the States

How can states improve opportunities for teacher learning, and focus professional development activities insupport of standards-based reforms? Most decisions about professional development are now made at the schooland district levels. When state policymakers have addressed professional development issues in the past, they focusedon funding, mandating in-service time, or raising recertification requirements. However, states can influence thefocus, scope, and quality, as well as the quantity, of professional development. Here are steps some states are taking:

1. Policymakers are asking how much is being spent on professional development, and how this moneyis being spent. They want answers before spending more on professional development. Most states and schooldistricts are spending much more than they know on professional development. The bulk of the spending goes notfor workshops and conferences, but for salary increments awarded for obtaining graduate credits or degrees. Often

4 2

these credits and degrees are unrelated to teachers' current assignments or school needs. Before allocating additionalfunds, policymakers should find out what is currently being invested in teacher development and make sure it is putto good use.

Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina and a number ofother states are making substantial new investments in professional development. However, only a few states aretrying to track expenditures to determine how federal, state, and local funds are spent.

2. Some states are conducting policy reviews to determine how their policies affect local decisions aboutprofessional development. Does the state require district or school plans for professional development? How doesrequired content affect the quality and nature of professional development? How do recertification requirementsshape local decisions? Do categorical programs have their own professional development requirements? Review ofstate policies may reveal conflicts with principles of good practice and unnecessary prescription and complexity.

Colorado and Michigan, in cooperation with the National Governors Association, have recently conductedsuch policy reviews. A number of states, such as Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, New Mexico and Utah, initiatedstudies of professional development. Twelve states are conducting policy inventories in cooperation with theNational Commission on Teaching and America's Future and the Consortium for Policy Research in Education.

3. State policymakers are increasingly aware that local districts are likely to need some guidance,perhaps some incentives, to change their approaches to professional development. Existing professionaldevelopment routines are well-established and comfortable; they often are intertwined with collective bargainingagreements and recertification requirements. It is time to offer some guidance to local districts and providers aboutthe characteristics of high-quality professional development. States should probably not set standards forprofessional development. But there seems to be an emerging consensus about the general principles that shouldguide professional development policies and programs.

States are using a variety of approaches to influence the quality of professional development provided bylocal schools. Thirteen states have developed standards and guidelines for local professional development. Kentuckyand Massachusetts have attempted to establish systems for approving providers, and Michigan has been workingwith providers to improve the quality of their services.

4. Time is the most critical, and most scarce, resource for professional development. States are takingsteps to provide more time, but state policymakers are becoming aware that simply adding more workshop days maydo little to improve instruction. Blocks of time are needed for intense immersion to improve subject-matterknowledge and to try out new instructional approaches. Time during the workday is needed for follow-up anddialogue among teachers. This may mean more professional development days, but it also means re-thinking howtime is used.

Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and ten other states mandate that time be setaside for professional development. Numerous states have considered similar proposals but not acted because oftheir cost and impact on the length of the school year. Some state education agencies have started to provide districtsassistance in scheduling to provide more interaction among teachers during the school day. A few states such asIndiana, Illinois and Tennessee allow schools to bank time for professional development by lengthening the schoolday.

5 3

5. States are beginning to recognize the value of the informal learning that teachers experience throughprofessional activities such as serving on curriculum committees, serving as assessors for state and local assessmentprograms, working as mentors to new teachers, and working on curriculum development teams. These and similaractivities involve teachers in reflection and dialogue about their classroom practice; they should be recognized asprofessional development, and should count toward recertification. Vermont, Virginia, and Massachusetts are statesthat have moved in this direction.

6. Institutions of higher education are being encouraged to assume greater responsibility forprofessional development. They train teachers and administrators, and have the capacity to provide continuingeducation. It makes little sense to circumvent publicly supported institutions of higher learning because ofdissatisfaction with their graduates. Creating alternative systems to provide professional development is expensive,and only reinforces the status quo in higher education. We should make effective use of these resources or close theprograms.

While many state officials complain about the unresponsiveness of institutions of higher education, there arepromising new developments. Maine, Louisiana, and Wyoming are building higher education partnerships statewide.In Georgia and South Carolina, universities are involved in providing professional development. Nevada hasestablished partnerships between its schools and community colleges to offer professional development intechnology. Michigan, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Vermont and some other states are encouraging the developmentof professional development schools to be jointly run by institutions of higher education and school districts. Highereducation institutions are heavily involved in most of the State Systemic Initiatives (SSIs) funded by the NationalScience Foundation.

7. Teachers' unions and subject-matter organizations are being invited to play more active roles. Theseorganizations have a stake in improving the quality of the profession, and, in some places, they have taken the leadin offering better professional development. They are in the best position to disseminate information aboutprofessional development options, and to influence the preferences of their members. They have credibility with theirmembers and established networks. Although many states have involved the state affiliates of the National ScienceTeachers Association and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics in their SSIs, there is still limited use ofteachers' organizations as vehicles for professional development. The subject-matter networks in California areprobably the best example of how teacher organizations can contribute to professional development.

***************

The Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) is indebted to the chief state school officers andthe many people from state professional development and teacher certification offices, professional associations, andinstitutions of higher education who took the time to assist in this study. They participated in lengthy interviews,provided important documentation, and reviewed their state profiles in draft form. Their cooperation and assistancewere essential to this work.

The information presented in the profiles was collected through telephone interviews and document reviewsconducted by CPRE staff in 1996. For each state, CPRE staff interviewed eight to twelve individuals knowledgeableabout policies, programs, and practices affecting teacher professional development.

The initial point of contact was typically the chief state school officer who, in almost all cases, referred us toappropriate officials within the state education agency. CPRE researchers conducted a consistent set of coreinterviews across the fifty states that included, but were not limited to, representatives of: state education agencyoffices of professionaUstaff development and teacher certification; governor's offices; state education associations;schools of education; and the educational research community in the state.

6

CPRE researchers supplemented these core interviews with interviews of additional state officials, staff ofprofessional standards boards, and, in most states, representatives of major professional development initiatives.

The interview information was augmented by review of documents and materials obtained from respondents.In addition, CPRE consulted its own data files from other research projects.

The information obtained from these sources is summarized in four page profiles of the professionaldevelopment activity for each state. CPRE submitted draft profiles to each state education agency for review andcomment in the summer and fall of 1996. Revisions were made to correct factual errors or omissions.

Neither the Carnegie Corporation of New York, nor the National Institute on Educational Governance,Finance, Policymaking and Management in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Departmentof Education, is responsible for any errors, omissions or misinterpretations in the state profiles. The profiles providea portrait of the supports and opportunities for teacher learning in each state as of late 1996. We hope readers willbring any errors to our attention.

°^4

5

Gui

de to

the

Stat

e Pr

ofes

sion

al D

evel

opm

ent P

rofi

les

Thi

s co

llect

ion

of s

tate

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t pro

files

pro

vide

s a

wea

lth o

f inf

orm

atio

n on

eac

hof

the

50 s

tate

s. T

he fo

llow

ing

grid

iden

tifie

s th

e st

ates

that

had

take

n pa

rtic

ular

act

ions

to p

rom

ote

prof

essi

onal

dev

elop

men

t for

teac

hers

as

of th

e fa

ll of

199

6.

ST

AT

E IN

ITIA

TIV

ES

: The

firs

t thr

ee c

olum

ns in

dica

te w

hich

sta

tes

have

dev

elop

ed s

tate

pla

ns fo

rpr

ofes

sion

al d

evel

opm

ent,

adop

ted

stat

e st

anda

rds

for

prof

essi

onal

dev

elop

men

t, an

d co

nduc

ted

stat

ewid

e st

udie

s of

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t.

ST

AT

E R

EQ

UIR

EM

EN

TS

: The

four

th a

nd fi

fth c

olum

ns id

entif

y th

e st

ates

that

man

date

the

amou

nt o

ftim

e lo

cal d

istr

icts

mus

t ded

icat

e to

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t, an

d th

e st

ates

that

req

uire

dis

tric

ts to

deve

lop

loca

l pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t pla

ns.

ST

AT

E F

UN

DIN

G: C

olum

ns s

ix th

roug

h ni

ne s

how

whi

ch s

tate

s pr

ovid

e fu

ndin

g fo

r lo

cal p

rofe

ssio

nal

deve

lopm

ent,

whi

ch s

tate

s aw

ard

com

petit

ive

gran

ts fo

r pr

ofes

sion

al d

evel

opm

ent,

whi

ch s

tate

s fu

ndpr

ofes

sion

al d

evel

opm

ent d

eliv

ery

syst

ems,

and

whi

ch s

tate

s of

fer

stat

ewid

e pr

ofes

sion

al d

evel

opm

ent

prog

ram

s.

IND

UC

TIO

N P

RO

GR

AM

S: C

olum

ns te

n th

roug

h tw

elve

iden

tify

the

stat

es th

at m

anda

te in

duct

ion

prog

ram

s fo

r ne

w te

ache

rs, t

hat h

ave

volu

ntar

y in

duct

ion

prog

ram

s, a

nd th

at p

rovi

de fu

ndin

g fo

rin

duct

ion

prog

ram

s.

ST

AT

E IN

CE

NT

IVE

S: C

olum

n th

irtee

n sh

ows

whi

ch s

tate

s re

quire

pro

fess

iona

l dev

elop

men

t for

rece

rtifi

catio

n, a

nd c

olum

n fo

urte

en s

how

s w

hich

sta

tes

enco

urag

e te

ache

rs to

see

k ce

rtifi

catio

n fr

omth

e N

atio

nal B

oard

for

Pro

fess

iona

l Tea

chin

g S

tand

ards

(N

BP

TS

).

8

9

Gui

de to

the

Stat

e Pr

ofes

sion

al D

evel

opm

ent P

rofi

les

Stat

e In

itiat

ives

Stat

eR

equi

rem

ents

Stat

e Fu

ndin

gIn

duct

ion

Prog

ram

sSt

ate

Ince

ntiv

es

Sta

teP

lans

Sta

teS

tand

ards

Sta

teS

tudi

esS

tate

Man

date

dT

ime

Sta

teM

anda

ted

Loca

lP

lans

Sta

teF

undi

ng fo

rLo

cal

Pro

fess

iona

lD

evel

opm

ent

Sta

teC

ompe

l-iti

veG

rant

s

Sta

teF

unds

for

Del

iver

yS

yste

ms

Sta

te-le

dP

rofe

ss-

iona

lD

evel

op-

men

tP

rogr

ams

Sta

teM

anda

ted

Indu

ctio

nP

rogr

ams

Sta

teV

olun

tary

Indu

ctio

nP

rogr

ams

Sta

teF

undi

ngfo

rin

duct

ion

Pro

gram

s

Req

uire

dfo

rR

ecer

tifi-

catio

n

Sup

port

for

NB

PT

SC

ertif

i-ca

tion

Ala

bam

a

Ala

ska

Ariz

ona

Ark

ansa

s

Cal

iforn

ia

Col

orad

o

Con

nect

icut

Del

awar

e

Dis

tric

t of

Col

umbi

a

Flo

rida

Geo

rgia

Haw

aii

Idah

o

Illin

ois

r

Indi

ana

Iow

a

Kan

sas

Ken

tuck

y

11

Stat

e In

itiat

ives

Stat

eR

equi

rem

ents

Stat

e Fu

ndin

gIn

duct

ion

Prog

ram

sSt

ate

Ince

ntiv

es

Sta

teP

lans

Sta

teS

tand

ards

Sta

teS

tudi

esS

tate

Man

date

dT

ime

Sta

teM

anda

ted

Loca

lP

lans

Sta

teF

undi

ng fo

rLo

cal

Pro

fess

iona

lD

evel

opm

ent

Sta

leC

ompe

l-iti

veG

rant

s

Sta

teF

unds

for

Del

iver

yS

yste

ms

Sta

te-le

dP

rofe

ss-

iona

lD

evel

op-

men

tP

rogr

ams

Sta

teM

anda

ted

Indu

ctio

nP

rogr

ams

Sta

teV

olun

tary

Indu

ctio

nP

rogr

ams

Sta

teF

undi

ngfo

rIn

duct

ion

Pro

gram

s

Req

uire

dfo

rR

ecer

tifi-

catio

n

Sup

port

for

NB

PT

SC

ertif

i-ca

tion

Loui

sian

a

Mai

ne-

.-

-

Mar

ylla

nd-

-

Mas

sach

uset

ts

Mic

higa

n

Min

neso

ta

Mis

siss

ippi

Mis

sour

i

Mon

tana

Neb

rask

a

Nev

ada

New

Ham

pshi

re

New

Jer

sey

New

Mex

ico

New

Yor

k-.

'

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Nor

th D

akot

a

Ohi

o

Okl

ahom

a

1213

Stat

e In

itiat

ives

Stat

eR

equi

rem

ents

Stat

e Fu

ndin

gIn

duct

ion

Prog

ram

sSt

ate

Ince

ntiv

es

Sta

teP

lans

Sta

teS

tand

ards

Sta

teS

tudi

esS

tate

Man

date

dT

ime

Sta

teM

anda

ted

Loca

lP

lans

Sta

teF

undi

ng fo

rLo

cal

Pro

fess

iona

lD

evel

opm

ent

Sta

teC

ompe

t-iti

veG

rant

s

Sta

teF

unds

for

Del

iver

yS

yste

ms

Sta

te-le

dP

rofe

ss-

iona

lD

evel

op-

men

tP

rogr

ams

Sta

teM

anda

ted

Indu

ctio

nP

rogr

ams

Sta

teV

olun

tary

Indu

ctio

nP

rogr

ams

Sta

teF

undi

ngfo

rIn

duct

ion

Pro

gram

s

Req

uire

dfo

rR

ecer

tifi-

catio

n

Sup

port

for

NB

PT

SC

ertif

i-ca

tion

Ore

gon

-

.-.

-

Pen

nsyl

vani

a

Rho

de Is

land

Sou

th C

arol

ina

Sou

th D

akot

a

Ten

ness

ee

Tex

as

Uta

h

Ver

mon

t

Virg

inia

Was

hing

ton

Wes

t Virg

inia

Wis

cons

inr

1r

Wyo

min

g

14

C RE Teacher Professional Development Profile

AlabamaEducation Policy Context

Alabama's K-12 public educationsystem enrolls over 700,000

students annually. Spearheadedby new leadership, the Alabama Depart-ment of Education (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA) istransforming itself from a highly regula-tory to a service delivery agency. Thestate's education reform agenda focuseson student performance, local account-ability, and critical capital needs.

A lawsuit concerning equity fund-ing prompted the Alabama legislature topass a new Foundation Law in 1995,which eliminates line-item restrictions forlocal budgets. However, in order toreceive Foundation funds, districts mustsubmit to the State Board of Education(SBE) an annual program plan for each ofthe following areas: physical plant,transportation, professional develop-ment, technology, special education,vocational education, and at-risk ser-vices. A state bond issue has added$127million for K-12 public education tosupport the new funding formula; locallevies must also be maintained.

The legislature also passed anAccountability Law in 1995 to comple-ment the new Foundation formula. Thelaw charges the SBE with implementing astatewide assessment system (using anationally norm-referenced test), identi-fying core curricula for elementary andsecondary instruction, aligning teacher

Number of Teachers: 43,002Average Years of Experience: 14

Percentage Holding Master's Degrees: 53%Average Salary: $28,659'

preparation program approval require-ments with core curricular goals, andimplementing an assistance/interventionprogram for schools and school systemsthat fail to demonstrate improvement instudent performance.

Beginning in the 1995-96 schoolyear, the SBE annually receives andaudits districts' fiscal plans in the sevenFoundation Law program areas. Districtplans that are not approved may beresubmitted after the SEA providestechnical assistance for budget revision.Lastly, each district is required todistribute, for public record, an annualaccountability report on the district as awhole and on each school under itsjurisdiction. The report provides infor-mation on expenditures, student achieve-ment, safety, and disciplinary matters.

The State Role inProfessional Development

Alabama's professional develop-ment policies focus on the premise thatviable opportunities are possible onlywhen a legitimate commitment is made bythe highest level of an organization'sadministration. In 1994, the SBE adopteda state policy for professional develop-ment, which established the SEA' sOffice of Professional Development,identified standards for professionaldevelopment, required districts andschools to develop annual professionaldevelopment plans, and linked teacher

recertification and evaluation to profes-sional development. However, some ofthis activity was rescinded as of the1996-97 school year (i.e., the Office ofProfessional Development was elimi-nated and the professional developmentstandards are no longer mandated).

Teacher Certification Policies. Ala-bama has three levels of teachercertification: an eight-year Class BProfessional Certificate; a master's level,ten-year Class A Certificate; and, forteachers who complete 33 semesterhours beyond the master's degree, a 12-

year Class AA Certificate. All threecertificates are issued on a renewablebasis, provided that the teacher hastaught full-time for at least four, five, orsix years, respectively, during the timeperiod for which their certificate is valid.In addition, teachers must participate intheir districts' annual professional de-velopment program or complete 12

semester hours (18 quarter hours) ofundergraduate or graduate credit. Incen-tives are not provided for teachers whoobtain National Board Certification.However, state law stipulates that oncethe National Board for ProfessionalTeaching Standards (NBPTS) program isfully implemented, any out-of-stateteacher holding Board certification willbe automatically eligible for reciprocalcertification in Alabama.

The Beginning Teachers Assis-tance Program (BTAP) was created bythe SEA in 1990. BTAP pairs a new

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely

those of the authors.

lv

teacher with a trained mentor whoobserves, coaches, and provides feed-back on classroom performance. Thementor and beginning teacher work in aformative mode, and all information theyshare remains confidential. The stateissues guidelines for this program butoffers no funding. Districts thatvolunteer to implement BTAP are re-sponsible for training mentors, provid-ing mentors' release time, and monitor-ing and evaluating BTAP activity. A fullreview of teacher certification rules andregulations is underway and should becompleted with recommended changesby October of 1996.

In 1994, the state began piloting aperformance-based teacher evaluationprocess. As of the 1997-98 school year,this evaluation will be mandated state-wide. The SEA has constructed a list ofteaching competencies that will serve ascriteria for the evaluation. The evalua-tion itself will include classroom obser-vations (conducted by the principal) andother documentation of teacher perfor-mance (e.g., lesson plans and participa-tion in professional growth activities).During their first three years of service,teachers will be evaluated annually;thereafter, they will undergo evaluationevery two years.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA conducts extensive professionaldevelopment sessions on finance andinstruction during the summer months.In 1996, more than 10,000 educatorsparticipated in this type of training.There is no charge to educators forparticipation in these activities.

Regional Inservice Centers (RICs)are the primary conduits for the state'stechnical assistance and professionaldevelopment services. Created in 1984,there are currently 11 Centers locatedacross the state. The Centers areuniversity-based and are subjected toevaluation by the SEA every three years.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Alabama is participating inGoals 2000. Local education agenciesmay submit applications for Goals 2000funds to the SEA. All funds are to beused for instructional technology (bothhardware and software) and training foreducators in the use of technology.

Public Funding forProfessional Development

State Funds. The Foundation Lawidentifies professional development as amandated allocation within state andlocal budgets. During the 1995-96school year, the state funding formulawas $60 per teacher unit, which was usedto fund the RICs. In 1996-97, the fundingformula increased to $120 per unit. Thisallocation was split between the RICs(which received a total of $2.6 million)and a direct allocation to districts at therate of $60 per teacher unit. TheFoundation Law also allocates $200 perteacher unit to support districts' tech-nology programs. Technology fundsmay be used to purchase equipment,software, and training.

Federal Funds. During the 1995-96school year, Alabama received a $4.2-million Eisenhower Professional Devel-opment grant and a $5.9-million Goals2000 grant. Approximately $200,000 infederal Chapter 2 and Title VI grants wereused to fund SEA-sponsored profes-sional development.

Local Funds. The AccountabilityLaw requires local systems to allocatefunds for professional developmentbased on the rate appropriated perteacher unit by the Foundation Law.

Impact of State Policies onLocal ProfessionalDevelopment

As of the 1995-96 school year, localsystems and schools are required todesign, implement, and evaluate anannual professional development plan inorder to receive state-aid funds. Eachdistrict and school must create aprofessional development advisory com-mittee, which is responsible for conduct-ing a needs assessment to identify goalsfor the professional development plans.The state does not require teachermembership on the committee; however,it is strongly encouraged. Both plans areapproved by local boards of education,but only the district plan is submitted tothe SEA. All districts appoint aprofessional development contact per-son to serve as a liaison to the SEA.

17

The state school-year calendarincludes five non-instructional days forteachers. These days are not mandatedfor particular activities and therefore mayinclude in-service as well as schoolopening and closing activities.

Teacher Compensation forProfessional Development

Collective bargaining is not permit-ted in Alabama. Teachers' salaries arelinked to certification status and thenumber of years of teaching experiencethey possess. While there are someexceptions, local systems rarely reim-burse tuition.

Other ProfessionalDevelopment Opportunities

The Alabama Education Associa-tion (AEA) offers professional develop-ment workshops throughout the year, aswell as a two-day conference in Marchthat is attended by more than 3,000teachers annually. AEA has designed 31workshop packages that are deliveredupon request to local systems by a teamof 40 full-time field directors. During the1994-95 year, the most frequently re-quested workshop topics were inclu-sion, site-based management, and grantwriting. AEA professional developmentservices are state-approved and areoffered to districts and schools free ofcharge.

The Alabama State Teacher Forum(ASTF) was organized in 1994 by formerrecipients of the Alabama Teachers ofthe Year award to promote the role ofclassroom teachers as educational lead-ers in the state. ASTF is composed of 90exemplary teachers, and its activities aregoverned by an eight-member Leader-ship Council. During the 1994-95 schoolyear, ASTF conducted 15 statewideTeachers as Leaders workshops, whichwere attended by 650 teachers. In 1995-96, three regional workshops wereconducted and attracted 450 partici-pants. These free, one-day summerworkshops bring classroom teacherstogether to learn about Alabama'seducation reforms and the innovativeteaching strategies that will help them

meet reform goals. Teachers receive fivecontinuing education units, awarded byAuburn University, for participation.Other ASTF activities include organizingteacher forums at the local level,coordinating a teacher electronic net-work, distributing teacher surveys, andproviding information to state officialsregarding teacher opinions and ideas oneducational issues. In 1995-96, theASTF conducted an Outstanding Edu-cators Symposium that convened 70exemplary Alabama teachers to sharetheir knowledge and insights withmembers of the business community,elected officials, and educational lead-ers. The 1996-97 symposium will includeapproximately 100 teachers. ASTF isfunded through private foundation andcorporate contributions.

The Alabama Staff DevelopmentCouncil (ASDC) was created by a groupof RIC directors in 1984 and became astate affiliate of the National StaffDevelopment Council in 1989. ASDCserves to promote and sustain teacherprofessional development opportunitiesthrough advocacy with state officials,activities such as its annual two-daystate conference, and a Best PracticesConference, which will be implementedfor the first time in 1996. ASDC activitiesare governed by a Board of Directors,composed of the council president andvice president, as well as a representa-tive from each of the 11 RICs. ASDCactivities are funded through member-ship fees; 300 educators are currentlyregistered with the council.

Contacts/InformationResources

Eddie R. JohnsonAssistant State Superintendent ofEducationAlabama State Department of EducationP.O. Box 302101Montgomery, AL 36130-2101334-242-9960

Anne JolleyExecutive DirectorAlabama State Teacher ForumP.O. Box 1562Montgomery, AL 36102334-279-1886

Robert LipscombPresidentAlabama Staff Development CouncilMerts Administration Building200 White StreetHuntsville, AL 35801205-532-4774

Publications and Reports

Professional Development: A Blueprintfor Excellence, Alabama State Depart-ment of Education (policy brochure,1995).

Professional Development Plan: Guide-lines and Definitions, Alabama StateDepartment of Education (1995).

I Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures arefor 1993.

18

Ordering Information

Copies of other state teacher profes-sional development profiles are availablethrough the Consortium for PolicyResearch in Education. Copies of thecomplete 50-state report are also avail-able. Please call 215-573-0700, x0 forfurther information.

Copies of the teacher professionaldevelopment profiles are available onCPRE's home page at:

http://www.upenn.edu/gse/cpre/

3


AlaskaEducation Policy Context

laska is unique in itslarge geographical size andmall population. There are

125,948 students enrolled in the state's53 public school districts. The statefaces the dual challenges of deliveringquality education to students living inrural, isolated areas, and of providingquality professional development toteachers in remote areas. The state hasaddressed these challenges by develop-ing live, interactive telecommunicationformats, including teleconferencing anddistributing audio and video tapes.

The state is engaged in educationreform, and its Goals 2000 initiative,Alaska 2000, was cited as a major statepriority in recent years. Through Alaska2000, the state has developed contentstandards in math, science, socialstudies, and English. These standardshave been adopted and are now beingimplemented. Standards for arts, foreignlanguages, and health education arecurrently being developed.

In addition, Governor Knowles hasundertaken a Quality Schools Initiativewith six major components: qualityacademic standards and assessments,quality standards for professional edu-cators, quality school standards througha new school accreditation system,increased family involvement in educa-tion, reform of the state's education



funding program to achieve greaterequity, and the establishment of a stateeducational endowment to provide long-term, stable funding for public educa-tion. The state is in the process ofpiloting performance assessment inwriting.

The Alaska Department of Educa-tion (referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) established aTask Force on Teacher Certification thatis addressing standards for educators byrevising the state's teacher certificationand preservice policies. The Task Forceis also examining the accreditation ofpreservice programs. Only one institu-tion of higher education in Alaska iscurrently accredited by the NationalCouncil for the Accreditation of TeacherEducation.

In May of 1996, the state legislatureenacted HB 465, which increased fromtwo to three the number of years ateacher must work before achievingtenure. It also required school districtsto adopt an evaluation plan for teachersand administrators based on perfor-mance standards set by the SEA. TheSEA, in conjunction with the Associa-tion of Alaska School Boards, estab-lished the Evaluation Project Committee,which is currently developing teacherperformance standards and models forevaluation instruments that can be usedby districts. HB 465 requires schoolboards to include students, parents,

community members, and professionaleducators in designing an evaluationsystem based on performance stan-dards.


Currently, there is no statewide planfor teacher professional development inAlaska. Professional development is acomponent of other statewide educationreform efforts, such as the developmentof a new teacher certification system orthe implementation of new studentstandards. The state's ProfessionalTeaching Practices Commission advisesthe State Board of Education on issuesregarding teacher licensure.

Teacher Certification Policies. Af-ter receiving a bachelor's degree from anaccredited institution of higher educa-tion and completing six semester hoursof residency credit, teachers are eligiblefor a Type A teaching certificate. Newteachers are considered to have provi-sional status for the first three years oftheir careers, although there is no state-mandated evaluation process for begin-ning teachers. The probationary periodrelates to employment and not tocertification. New teachers who arecertified through Alaska's alternateprogram receive an individualized certifi-cation plan listing professional develop-ment needs. Teachers certified in this



n 0 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

way are considered to be apprenticeteachers and work with a trained mentorfor one year.

All candidates for certification arerequired to take one course inmulticultural education and one coursein Alaskan studies. Teachers who havenot completed these requirements priorto certification receive a two-year, non-renewable Provisional Certificate, duringwhich they must complete the require-ment. The Type A certificate isrenewable every five years. In order torenew, teachers must submit a renewalapplication and fee and complete sixsemester hours or nine quarter hours ofcoursework during the five-year period.

The state is in the midst ofredesigning its teacher certification andrecertification policies. The Task Forceon Teacher Certification is consideringsuch elements as requiring individualprofessional development plans foreducators and district professional de-velopment plans aligned with stan-dards. The new performance standardsand teacher evaluation policies arelinked to employment, but not torecertification. The state is alsoconsidering recognizing or granting"Master Teacher" status to NationalBoard Certified teachers.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA provides professional developmentin Alaska in a variety of ways. It offersconferences and workshops to helpeducators implement state initiatives,particularly regarding content stan-dards; it maintains a state-run highschool that serves as a training site forteachers; and it is also a partner in theAlaska Staff Development Network.

The SEA plays a key role in theAlaska Staff Development Network(called the Network), which is adminis-tered by the University of AlaskaSoutheast. The Network is a statewidepartnership that includes the NEA-Alaska, the Alaska Council of SchoolAdministrators, Alaska's five universi-ties and colleges, the Northwest Re-gional Educational Laboratory, 52 Alas-kan school districts, as well as a numberof professional associations for educa-tors. Each year, approximately 3,000

2

Alaskan educators from all of the state'sschool districts participate in face-to-face and distance-learning training ac-tivities sponsored by the Network.

An executive committee that in-cludes representatives from school dis-tricts, universities, professional associa-tions, and the SEA governs the Network.An annual meeting of Network organiza-tional representatives is held eachMarch to review Network programs andestablish Network priorities. In 1989, theNetwork was recognized by the NationalCouncil of States on Inservice Educationas one of the nation's ten best staffdevelopment programs.

The Network is completing the firstyear of a three-year project to develop acomprehensive distance-learning train-ing program, the Alaska 2000 Profes-sional Development Coalition, which isfunded by the U.S. Department ofEducation. The training programsenable teachers to address state andnational standards in math, science,social studies, and English/languagearts in their own classrooms throughdistance-learning courses. The courseswere piloted in the spring of 1996 and willbe made available statewide to alleducators during the 1996-97 schoolyear.

The Network collaborated with theSEA to develop a series of four trainingcourses for the KIDS 2000 initiative.(KIDS stands for Knowledge IntegrationDesigned with Standards.) The coursesuse the newly developed AlaskanFrameworks, national documents, andclassroom examples and models to assisteducators in implementing the newcontent standards and in redesigningclassroom instruction to help studentsachieve the standards. The courseswere offered in the spring of 1996;participating educators were awardedthree college credits.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Alaska has used its Goals2000 funding to support local improve-ment efforts and to develop and supportthe adoption of state content standards.These activities have included profes-sional development for educators.

21


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state budget for the professionaldevelopment of Alaska's educators.The state does provide some technicalassistance, conferences and workshopsfor educators. The state does not requirethat local funds be set aside forprofessional development.

Federal Funds. In Year 2 of Goals2000, Alaska received $1,547,345 tosupport local reform efforts. Ninetypercent of these funds was allocated tolocal districts, and much of the fundingwas used to support teacher profes-sional development. In FY 1995, Alaskareceived $1,243,473 in Eisenhower fund-ing to support professional develop-ment.

Local Funds. Districts are notrequired to set aside money for profes-sional development. Policies regardingspending for professional developmentvary widely by district.

Impact of State Policieson Local ProfessionalDevelopment

There are state requirements forprofessional development related tofetal alcohol syndrome, sex equity, andchild abuse, but school districts are notcurrently required to establish staffdevelopment plans. Many districts docreate professional development plans,however, and some also maintain profes-sional development committees.

The SEA requires that districtssubmit plans describing how they intendto use scheduled professional develop-ment days. Districts are allowed to useup to ten days for in-service activities;the state does not mandate a minimumnumber of days. How in-service topicsand which major providers of profes-sional development are selected variesgreatly by district. Universities providesome professional development oppor-tunities, and many districts use their ownstaff or hire private consultants.


Alaska's teachers bargain overprofessional development at the locallevel, although this process varies fromdistrict to district. Teachers may bargainfor time to pursue professional develop-ment and for the content of in-serviceactivities.

Depending on the individualdistrict's resources, teachers are some-times reimbursed for professional devel-opment costs and are sometimes pro-vided leare time to pursue professionaldevelopment. Teachers generally re-ceive salary increments based on profes-sional development activities. Again,the policies vary by district and bycontract.

Other ProfessionalDevelopmentOpportunities

The NEA-Alaska offers profes-sional development to its membersthrough conferences and workshops.NEA-Alaska staff work with the NEAprogram, Team Approach to BetterSchools, in which teachers collectivelymanage a school with the principal. OneAlaska school is currently participating,and another has expressed interest.NEA-Alaska paid for the training of twoteachers, the principal, and a staffmember at the participating school. Anumber of subject-matter organizationsin Alaska also provide professionaldevelopment opportunities for theirmembers.

The Alaska State Writing Consor-tium, housed at the University of Alaskain Juneau, is funded by a NationalWriting Project grant and by localdistrict subscriptions, and is affiliatedwith the Bay Area Writing Program. TheConsortium provides professional de-velopment for teachers and uses atrainer-of-trainers model, in which teach-ers attend initial courses and later applyto become fellows. After completing aseries of institutes, fellows return to theirdistricts and train other school staff.

District subscriptions cost $1,000 peryear. Approximately one-third ofAlaska's teachers have participated atsome level in Consortium training.

Higher education institutions pro-vide professional development to teach-ers through course offerings, and theyhelp to develop professional develop-ment opportunities through the Net-work. The University of Alaska housesthe Writing Consortium and the Net-work, helps to solicit grants to supportteacher professional development, andshares technological resources, such asaccess to the Internet.


Chris Niemi, AdministratorTeacher Certification and EducationAlaska Department of EducationGoldbelt Place801 West 10th Street, Suite 200Juneau, AK 99801-1894907-465-2441

Bonnie BarberAlaska Education Association3198 Judge Arend AvenueFairbanks, AK 99709907-479-4442

Kelly TonsmaireDirectorAlaska State Development NetworkUniversity of Alaska907-465-8744






3

`-PRE Teacher Professional Development Profile

ArizonaEducation Policy Context

Arizona's K-12 public educationsystem is comprised of 226school districts, many of which

are rural and half of which serve fewerthan 600 students. Under the directionof its elected state superintendent,Arizona is moving ahead on severalmajor education reform fronts. First andforemost is the belief that schoolsshould be unencumbered by rules,regulations, and bureaucracy. In "AVision for Education Reform in Arizona,"released on February 15, 1996, StateSuperintendent Lisa Graham Keeganoutlines her reform agenda, calling for astudent-centered system in which "ex-ceptional schools run largely indepen-dently" and are supported by state-of-the-art technology.

Regarding instructional areas, theplan calls for clear, measurable academicstandards; career majors for high schoolstudents; performance-based and norm-referenced state tests and state gradua-tion requirements; additional paid daysfor teachers to participate in specific,ongoing professional development andtraining, including 20 extra paid daysevery three years; a residency/mentor-ship program that will license educatorsbased on their ability to teach to highacademic standards; additional instruc-tional days in grades three and four toensure proficiency in mathematics andreading; parental involvement; adult


Percentage Holding Master's Degrees: 43%Average Salary: $31,8251

literacy programs; alternative educa-tional programs; and funding for safe-schools legislation. Regarding financeissues, the plan specifies funding forlow-wealth schools that have immediatebuilding needs; a construction and debtcommission to examine facilities fund-ing; exploration of better funding mecha-nisms for buildings; exploration ofinterest payments on bonds; a financesystem that facilitates "dollars followingstudents" on a real-time basis; andfunding for unmet special educationcosts.

Arizona is a leader in charter schoolsreform, with 126 such schools in

operation. Although some of theseschools are governed by a separate stateboard, the downsized and restructuredState Department of Education (referredto hereafter as the state educationagency, or SEA) is responsible forproviding information and technicalassistance services to these schools.Because of the autonomy affordedcharter schools, each school must betreated as a separate district.


Central to Arizona's plan for studentimprovement is intensive, focused pro-fessional development specifically tiedto students' needs. The state superin-tendent regards professional develop-ment and teacher certification as corner-

stones of her education reform vision.She states, "We must set high standardsfor teachers and create a professionaldevelopment structure conducive tomeeting these standards." In 1995, aprofessional development skills reviewcommittee was formed. The committee iscomprised of representatives from par-ent groups, teacher and administratororganizations, and colleges of educationand serves an advisory role to the StateBoard of Education (SBE). The commit-tee has recently drafted standards forteacher preparation, induction, and con-tinuing professional growth based onInterstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium (INTASC) andNational Council for the Accreditation ofTeacher Education (NCATE) recommen-dations, as well as teaching competen-cies adopted by other states.

The proposed standards represent ashift away from prescriptive certificationpolicies in favor of a system based onproficiency assessment. If adopted bythe Arizona SBE, the new system wouldbe implemented during 1997. Thestandards are structured around threephases. At the Pre-service PreparationPhase, education programs would un-dergo a state approval process to ensurethat their curriculum corresponds to theteacher standards and prepares teachersto pass subject-matter assessments thatare aligned with student standards. TheInduction Phase would require begin-ning teachers to participate in a district-

'Thisprofile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy -Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

o3

sponsored support program and pass aperformance assessment. During thethird phase, continuing teachers wouldbe expected to implement an individualprofessional development plan based onthe teacher's professional interests, theteacher's knowledge of the state stan-dards for students, and the school'simprovement goals and objectives.

Teacher Certification Policies. Theproposed teacher standards would es-tablish a two-year Provisional Certificateissued to beginning teachers who hadcompleted either a traditional or state-approved training program and hadpassed a professional and content-areatest. Provisional teachers would berequired to participate in a BeginningTeacher Support System mentoringprogram and pass a performance assess-ment in order to receive the StandardCertificate. The Standard Certificatewould be renewable every six years,upon district verification that the teacherhad completed an individual profes-sional development plan consisting of aminimum of 180 clock hours (or 12 sem-ester hours of university coursework). Itwould be possible to earn professionaldevelopment hours through activitiessuch as district in-service, professionalseminars, academic coursework, trainingto conduct Phase H performance assess-ments, serving in a professional leader-ship role, educational research, orserving on an accreditation team.

State-Supported Programs. Beforethe SEA was downsized and restruc-tured, it offered considerable profes-sional development opportunities. WhileSEA staff still provide some professionaldevelopment for teachers, this functionis no longer primary. However, under thereorganization, a new Office of Profes-sional Development and Certificationwas created. A concerted effort is beingmade to tie together all aspects ofteacher professional growth, frompreservice to in-service activities.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. More than 90 percent of theGoals 2000 funds allocated in the firsttwo years of Arizona's Goals 2000

2

program was used to support theplanning and implementation of compre-hensive local education plans, includingthose of charter schools. Some of thisfunding was expended by schools toprovide professional development.

The Phoenix Public Schools Districtis the recipient of a five-year, UrbanSystemic Initiative (USI) grant from theNational Science Foundation. This grantprovides funding for teacher profes-sional development in mathematics andscience.


State Funds. The state does notallocate funds to districts specifically forprofessional development. However,members and constituent groups fromthe skills review committee are searchingfor a sponsor to introduce legislationthat would provide state funds todistricts in support of Phase II and PhaseIII activities. Arizona's Career Ladderprogram is being implemented in 29districts. In 1996-97, the state allocated$26,272,491 to support the Career Ladderprogram; local supplements totaling$13,562,560 statewide also fund thisprogram.

Federal Funds. Arizona receivedGoals 2000 grants of $1,362,358 in 1994and $5,450,582 in 1995, and the stateexpects to receive $5,043,051 in 1996.Arizona also received $3,115,704 inEisenhower funds for K-12 professionaldevelopment in 1995.

Local Funds. Much of the state'slocal professional development dollarsappears to be acquired through CareerLadder funds. Some districts use aportion of these funds for staff develop-ment, which is offered to teacherssystemwide, regardless of their partici-pation in the Career Ladder program. Theamount differs widely in the districts thathave career ladders, and there is no staterequirement to expend money on profes-sional development.

24


Arizona, like many other states, hasa strong state-level vision that isimplemented according to local deci-sions. Local districts are required tohave a professional development plan.State monitoring of local professionaldevelopment plans is done informally.Since there are no in-service days in theofficial school-year calendar, the alloca-tion of time for professional develop-ment is determined at the districts'discretion.


In Arizona, all bargaining for profes-sional development occurs at the locallevel. Teachers may apply for CareerLadder salary supplements, which areawarded based on performance. Teacherorganizations also help local membersnegotiate career ladders, and in somedistricts, pay for performance initiatives.


The Arizona Education Association(AEA) is collaborating with US West toestablish links among teachers forexchanging information, networking, andtraining using the Internet. In anotherpartnership with US West, the AEA,SEA, and other educator associationsare initiating a project to providetechnology training and equipment for anumber of teachers throughout the state.The AEA also will collaborate with theNational Education Association (NEA)and a local university to begin a charterschool, and it has committed to providethe professional development necessaryto make the school a success.

Northern Arizona University (NAU)is participating in a number of school-university partnerships across the state.NAU faculty, sometimes working full-time at the district site, assist schools inthe design and implementation of teacherdevelopment and training activities.NAU also served as host for the annualTeacher Leaders' Retreat, which pro-vides leadership training for teachers.NAU is currently collaborating withdistricts across Arizona to identify anddesign professional development coursepackages that meet district and teacherneeds and that may potentially applytoward graduate degree requirements.Arizona State University (ASU), theUniversity of Arizona (UA), and GrandCanyon University also have estab-lished school-university partnerships inlocalities adjacent to their campus sites;most of these partnerships include aprofessional development componentfor partner school teachers.


Cary n ShoemakerDirector of Professional Development1535 W. Jefferson StreetPhoenix, AZ 85007602-542-5529

Penny CottermanVice PresidentArizona Education Association100 W. Clarendon, Suite 1600Phoenix, AZ 85013800-352-5411

Jon EngelhardtExecutive DirectorCenter for Excellence in EducationNorth Arizona University - Box 5774Flagstaff, AZ 86011520-523-7139

Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures arefor 1993,





3

sm ID- -

ArkansasEducation Policy Context

Airkansas is largely a rural statewith over 440,000 students in'ts public education system.

Many of Arkansas' individual schoolsare very small; in 1993, there were over 60high schools with graduating classes ofless than 25 students. The tradition oflocal control over public education isstrong in the state's 311 school districts.However, with the advent of recentreform initiatives, the state has beenplaying an increasingly larger role inimplementing policy that directly affectsschools.

In 1991, the Arkansas GeneralAssembly enacted Act 236, also knownas the "Meeting the National Educa-tional Goals: Schools for Arkansas'Future" subchapter. The legislation isconsidered to be the cornerstone of thestate's education reform efforts andincluded a number of independent, butinterrelated, reform initiatives. It re-quired the State Board of Education toadopt student learner outcomes, whichwere subsequently disseminated toschools. It also required the GeneralEducation Division (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA)of the state's Department of Education(which includes both the General Educa-tion Division and the Division of HigherEducation) to develop a plan to alignstatewide curriculum frameworks withstudent performance assessments and



teacher professional development activi-ties. The statute called for a total re-structuring of the state's public educa-tion system in order to achieve nationaleducation goals; the SEA was chargedwith developing a ten-year plan torestructure the system. It also requiredthat a task force be appointed to makerecommendations on the design andimplementation of a new system ofoutcome-based licensure for beginningteachers and administrators. The taskforce is currently reviewing preliminarydrafts of its recommendations. The Actalso required the SEA to providetechnical assistance to all schoolsinvolved in restructuring and, ultimately,to restructure itself in order to betterprovide leadership and support tofacilitate school and system restructur-ing.

To support its intended school-improvement efforts, Act 236 alsoestablished the Arkansas Academy forLeadership Training and Site-BasedManagement (discussed in further detailbelow).


Arkansas plans to incorporate pro-fessional development for teachers intoits overall restructuring plan for itspublic education system. As mentionedabove, Act 236 called for the integrationof professional development for teach-

ers and administrators with the develop-ment of new curriculum frameworks andstudent assessments. From 1991 to 1996,the state provided competitive grants ofup to $20,000 per year to approximately16 schools to support local restructur-ing, which included planning and profes-sional development activities. Act 236also required the SEA to providetraining, technical assistance, network-ing, and other support to schoolsinvolved in restructuring.

Another reform-related measure, Act1307, was passed during the 1995legislative session. It required the SEAto conduct a study of professionaldevelopment activities and opportuni-ties in local schools. The resulting reportdiscusses the content of professionaldevelopment activities, funding andreleased time for teachers, accountabilitysystems related to professional develop-ment, human resources, and statisticsthat demonstrate school progress inimplementing professional developmentin support of restructuring. This report,presented to the legislature in Septemberof 1996, will be used to determine thefuture role of the SEA in facilitatingprofessional development in localschools.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheSEA is in the process of revising itsexisting licensure and certification sys-tem. The state was required by Act 236to establish a task force to review thisissue. Once the work of the task force is

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


26

completed and its recommendations areadopted and implemented, the state'slicensing system will be changed toreflect state goals for outcome-basededucation. The task force is currentlydeveloping an outcome-based systemfor the licensing of beginning teachersand administrators based on high andrigorous standards. As part of thisprocess, the task force intends toexamine the issue of recertification forlicensed professionals.

Under the current licensure andcertification system, prospective teach-ers with a bachelor's degree who havecompleted an approved teacher educa-tion program can obtain a "StandardCertificate," which is a six-year credentialrenewable with teaching experience. Theonly existing recertification requirementfor educators is that they have taughtduring the previous credentialing period.Teachers are not required to undergoany evaluation or professional develop-ment in order to renew their licenses,although there is an evaluation processfor educators that is not linked torecertification. A teacher who earns amaster's degree can obtain a ten-year,renewable "Master Certificate."

State-Supported Programs. Onestate program established to strengthenthe education workforce is the Academyfor Leadership Training and School-Based Management, which is adminis-tered by the University of Arkansas atFayetteville. A coalition of universities,professional associations, businesses,corporations, educational cooperatives,and the SEA was established to createthe Academy. It provides trainingprograms and opportunities to developthe knowledge base and leadership skillsof educators, including teachers, princi-pals, superintendents, other administra-tors, and school board members. Itoffers training in four major areas:district support, leadership develop-ment, research information and technol-ogy, and the identification and recruit-ment of minority leaders. One of thegoals of the Academy is the creation oflearning communities in local schools,which also includes a focus on profes-sional development. The Academy usesworkshops and retreats to bring teamsfrom districts together to work on issues

they have identified: It also hosts aseries of institutes for teams, individuals,and teacher coaches.

The state also supports a system ofRegional Education Service Coopera-tives (RESCs) that provide a range ofservices to most districts in the state;one of their primary functions is to offerprofessional development. Currently,there are 15 RESCs operating in Arkan-sas, and they involve every district inevery county, except one. They are thelargest provider of professional develop-ment to teachers, primarily throughworkshop-style, one-day events. TheRESCs survey the districts that theyservice and offer professional develop-ment based on district needs. Eachdistrict pays a yearly fee of approxi-mately $1,000 for membership in itsRESC. Teachers are sent by theirdistricts to participate in classes, work-shops, and lectures.

The K-4 Initiative was created by theGovernor's Office and resulted in legisla-tion in 1991 mandating that students ingrades K-4 who do not perform at gradelevel attend summer school. In additionto funding, a large staff developmentcomponent accompanies this program.Teachers who want to teach summerschool are required to participate intargeted staff development. Modeled inpart after the highly successful MathCrusades program (discussed below),the K-4 Crusade includes a seven-daytraining program focusing on hands-onmath and science and language-basedreading and writing, as well as a relatedsix-hour graduate course that focuses onintegrating math and science withreading. The graduate course is offeredby 11 universities throughout the state,in conjunction with the Arkansas State-wide Systemic Initiative (also discussedbelow), the SEA, and the Division ofHigher Education. The professionaldevelopment program began in Januaryof 1995; to date, over 1,400 educatorshave participated in the graduate course,while over 4,000 have participated in theseven-day training program.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Arkansas has a strongStatewide Systemic Initiative, known asthe Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initia-tive (ASSI), that provides professional

2 7

development to teachers in the areas ofmath and science. The ASSI has ties tostate government, the Arkansas Educa-tion Association, and the ArkansasLeadership Academy. The programbuilds upon Arkansas' successful MathCrusades, which provided a highlyintensive staff development program forteachers in grades 5-12 in the use ofmanipulatives (objects that can be usedas learning tools), cooperative learning,and performance assessment. ASSI isjointly administered by the SEA and theHigher Education Division. The ASSI'sgoal is to identify, train, and support amath/science leader in every local schoolby the end of 1998.

Arkansas has participated in theCarnegie Middle Grades School StatePolicy Initiative (MGSSPI) since 1991,which has provided funding for profes-sional development in middle schools.In 1995 alone, Carnegie provided Arkan-sas with $230,000 to support profes-sional development activities. The statealso participates in Goals 2000 and theNew Standards Project and is consider-ing adopting the Interstate New TeacherAssessment and Support Consortium(INTASC) standards for teacher educa-tion.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe Arkansas state budget that specifi-cally targets professional developmentfor teachers. The Arkansas LeadershipAcademy is funded as a line item in thestate's budget; however, the LeadershipAcademy has other responsibilities inaddition to its professional developmentactivities, and it is unknown whatpercentage of its budget is allocated forprofessional development. Approxi-mately $9 million per year is spent on theK-4 Initiative, and $2 million of thatappropriation is earmarked for staffdevelopment. RESCs also receive statefunding. The state allocated $250,000per year from 1991-1996 for the restruc-turing grants program discussed above.The bulk of those funds was spent onlocal professional development andplanning activities in schools.

Federal Funds. Federal dollars thatflow through the state's Department ofEducation (such as Goals 2000,Eisenhower, and Chapter 1 and 2 funds)are the most heavily relied upon sourcesof funding for professional developmentin Arkansas. For example, of the totalfunding Arkansas received in Year 2 ofGoals 2000 ($3,650,495), 90 percentbecame district subgrants to continuelocal education reform efforts. Localdistricts, in turn, support professionaldevelopment activities with this funding.Arkansas also received $2,499,159 infederal Eisenhower grants in FY 1995.

Local Funds. Districts are notrequired to spend any set amount onstaff development. They rely heavily ongrant money from the state and othersources to fund these activities.


Teachers are required by the state toreceive 30 hours of staff developmentevery year, although this requirement isnot attached to recertification. There arestate guidelines regarding how the 30hours should be spent. Districts areresponsible for developing plans outlin-ing how they will provide opportunitiesfor teachers and fund professionaldevelopment activities. They may offerrelease time for teachers to pursueactivities outside the district or provideprofessional development that occurson the school site.

Districts can accumulate time toprovide professional development forteachers if they hold classes beyond therequired 5.5-hour school day. Up to 30minutes each day can be accumulated,and can then be used to dismissstudents early and to provide time for in-house staff development. In order to usethe time, districts must first submit a planto their field services representative inthe SEA.

Previously, districts regularly pro-vided the SEA with reports and informa-tion on their staff development plansnot only in instances in which bankedtime was requested or when districtswere up for accreditation. This review

policy was discontinued. Districts nowprovide the state with their professionaldevelopment plans when schools are upfor accreditation every five years. Statestandards for accreditation are currentlyunder revision, and it is expected that thenew standards will attempt to linkteacher classroom performance withprofessional development activities.


There is no collective bargaining atthe state level for professional develop-ment. However, professional develop-ment compensation is bargained for insome districts. According to the stateoffice of the Arkansas Education Asso-ciation (AEA), approximately 22 districtshave formal language in their contractspertaining to professional development.

Compensation for professional de-velopment activities varies widely fromdistrict to district, depending on adistrict's size and available resources.Some larger districts provide reimburse-ments to teachers for college coursesand other professional developmentcosts, while most smaller districts do not.Most teachers pay their own profes-sional development expenses. The award-ing of salary increments also varies bydistrict. Many districts award salaryincrements for college coursework; how-ever, continuing education units (CEUs)generally do not count toward anincrease on the salary scale.


The AEA provides a range ofprofessional development opportunitiesfor its members. Legislation was passedthat ensured teachers the right to attendthe annual AEA conference and to countthis participation towards their profes-sional development requirement. Theact was recently amended to includeother professional organizations' con-ferences as well. In addition, the AEAprovides training and stipends to itsteacher members, so that they can trainother teachers on site.

2

Active content-related teacher orga-nizations, including the Arkansas chap-ter of the National Council of Teachers ofMathematics, provide professional de-velopment to their members. Othergroups, such as the Arkansas Associa-tion for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment and the Arkansas Asso-ciation of Educational Administrators,are active in promoting professionaldevelopment for teachers.

Higher education plays a significantrole in providing professional develop-ment and in shaping policy in Arkansas.The Higher Education Division hasworked with the SEA on its task force toreview the state's teacher certificationpolicy. Universities across the state areworking with local schools to providetraining to preservice teachers. Highereducation institutions are partners in theArkansas Leadership Academy (whichis currently administered by the Univer-sity of Arkansas in Fayetteville), the K-4Initiative, and the ASSI. They are alsomajor participants in many of the state'sother activities regarding professionaldevelopment.

The Walton Family Foundation andthe Rockefeller Foundation were bothmentioned as supporters of education inArkansas. They provide some supportfor professional development activitiesto individual teachers doing exemplarywork in the classroom.


Beverly Reed, DirectorArkansas Leadership Academy153 Graduate Education BuildingUniversity of ArkansasFayetteville, AR 72701501-324-9300

Betty Gale DavisProgram Support ManagerInternal Professional DevelopmentArkansas Department of EducationGeneral Education DivisionLittle Rock, AR 72201-1071501-682-4475

Cora McHenry, Executive DirectorArkansas Education Association1500 West Fourth StreetLittle Rock, AR 72291-1064501-375-4611






29

CPRF, Teacher Professional Development Profile

CaliforniaEducation Policy Context

California is a large and diversestate, home to one in everyseven babies born in the United

States. Nearly five and a half millionstudents are enrolled in more than 1,000school districts, and an increasingmajority of California's students aremembers of minority groups. Childrenwith special needs, particularly thosewith limited English proficiency, pose anincreasing challenge for the state'seducation system. Public support foreducation sharply declined during the1980s; however, this shortfall in localtax revenue led to a 1988 state constitu-tional amendment requiring that 40percent of the state's budget be spent onpublic education.

Since the mid-1980s, the CaliforniaDepartment of Education (referred tohereafter as the state education agency,or SEA) has assumed a leadership roleby adopting discipline-based curriculumframeworks that are used to guideinstructional activities at the local level.A new state performance-based assess-ment, the California Learning Assess-ment System (CLAS), was developed tobe tightly linked with the frameworks.However, Governor Wilson vetoed theCLAS reauthorization bill due to criti-cisms regarding the state's test. InOctober of 1995, a new state testingprogram, the California Assessment ofAcademic Achievement, was authorized



for development. The legislation autho-rizing the new assessment also called forthe creation of the Commission for theEstablishment of Academic Content andPerformance Standards to develop newstandards by July of 1998. Once thesestandards are in place, the SEA will beresponsible for designing matchingassessments that contain elements ofthinking skills and performance-basedassessment, while at the same timereasserting the role of more traditionaltest formats and basic skills. Implemen-tation timelines for the new assessmentshave not been established.

The SEA introduced the ChallengeDistricts initiative in 1995. ChallengeDistricts must: (1) adopt measurablecontent and performance standards forevery subject in grades 2-10; (2)implement a performance-based assess-ment system in conjunction with existingannual assessments; (3) provide anannual local accountability report onstudent performance; (4) increase by 2percent annually those students whoperform at or above the standard; and (5)have 90 percent of all students perform-ing at or above the standard by the year2005. As of the summer of 1996, 50districts had registered for this initiative.

Results of the 1995 National As-sessment of Educational Progress(NAEP) fourth-grade reading exam rank-ed California fourth graders last in thenation in reading performance. TheNAEP findings have prompted state

officials to focus school reform efforts atthe elementary level, primarily through are-introduction of "phonics" for readinginstruction and a reduction of class sizesin primary grades. Governor Wilsonproposed legislation (SB 1777), passedin June of 1996, to provide funding toreduce class size/teacher ratios to 20 to 1at the primary level. Funding is providedannually at $650 per student for full-dayclass size reduction and $325 per studentfor half-day class size reduction. Dis-tricts must submit an application to theSEA to receive these funds. Districts arerequired to provide staff development toteachers who participate in the class sizereduction program. A one-time, state-wide appropriation of $200 million isavailable for the facility upgrades need-ed to support the program.


In the 1980s, then-SuperintendentBill Honig sought to initiate systemicschool reform in several ways. Toprovide a common subject-area vision,seven curriculum frameworks were de-veloped. The frameworks were intendedto serve as key policy documents forcurriculum and instruction, textbookselection, and the development ofassessments. Prior to the developmentof these frameworks, the success of theMathematics and Writing Projects initi-ated by the University of California had

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polity Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

begun to influence thinking regardingprofessional development. A state-commissioned report suggested thatthese programs provided a usefulprofessional development model. Inresponse to the report, the ProfessionalDevelopment Act (SB1882) was passedin 1988. This bill created the CaliforniaSubject Matter Projects and the Profes-sional Development Consortia (see be-low).

Teacher Certification Policies. TheCommission on Teacher Credentialing(CTC) is an autonomous board withpolicy-making authority in all aspects ofstate teacher preparation policy. CTCestablishes credentialing requirements,conducts educational research, setsaccreditation standards, evaluates insti-tutions to ensure that standards are met,and administers required testing pro-grams. Its activities are funded byteacher licensure fees.

Teaching credentials are offered attwo levels, the Preliminary Credentialand the Professional Credential. Thefive-year, nonrenewable PreliminaryCredential is issued to candidates whopossess a bachelor's degree, complete ateacher preparation program, and passthe California Basic Educational SkillsTest (CBEST). Out-of-state teachers areeligible to receive a one-year, nonrenew-able credential and must past the CBESTin order to obtain the PreliminaryCredential. During their first two years ofemployment, teachers are expected todemonstrate facility in the teaching ofreading, principles of the U.S. Constitu-tion, and subject-matter knowledge bycompleting a CTC-approved collegecourse or by taking the appropriatePraxis Series Subject Assessment.

In order to receive the ProfessionalCredential, teachers must pass coursesin health education, mainstreaming ex-ceptional education children, and com-puter education, as well as successfullycomplete 30 credits beyond the bachelor'sdegree, or a fifth-year program, approvedby a California teacher preparationinstitution. (The fifth-year program mayconsist of in-service training for whichcollege credit is given.) Once obtained,the Professional Credential is renewableevery five years if the candidate teachesat least one semester and completes an

2

individual professional growth plancomprised of 150 clock hours. Participa-tion in National Board Certificationprovides another way for teachers tomeet this requirement.

To address the growing numbers ofstudents with limited English profi-ciency, the CTC developed and imple-mented special standards for CLAD(Crosscultural Language and AcademicDevelopment) and BCLAD (BilingualCrosscultural Language and AcademicDevelopment) certification for bothbeginning and experienced practitioners.

With an influx of 14,000 newteachers into California classrooms eachyear, the Commission on TeacherCredentialing and the SEA piloted theCalifornia New Teacher Project (CNTP)from 1988 to 1992. Its purpose was tostudy alternative methods of supportingand assessing teachers who are new tothe classroom. In 1992, the legislatureand governor enacted SB 1422, whichrequires the Commission and the SEA tojointly administer a Beginning TeacherSupport and Assessment (BTSA) Pro-gram to provide support for newteachers during their first and secondyears of service. Through the BTSAProgram, the CTC and SEA are develop-ing innovative methods for assessingthe performance of new teachers. Schooldistricts, in collaboration with universi-ties, develop regional and local propos-als to receive BTSA funds from the state.It is estimated that 10 percent of first- andsecond-year teachers participate in BTSAprograms. In addition, the CaliforniaTeacher Mentor Program (begun in 1983)provides each district with money formentor teacher stipends, training, andrelease time.

State-Supported Programs. Themission of the California Subject MatterProjects (CSMPs) program is "to im-prove instruction in all disciplines at allgrade levels throughout California. Asecondary mission is to establish andsustain a vibrant professional culture ofand for teachers, one that providesteachers with ongoing support andopportunities to address the myriadchallenges of teaching in California's ...schools."

CSMPs have been formed in thedisciplines of writing, mathematics, sci-

ence, the arts, literature, foreign lan-guage, history-social science, and inter-national studies. The university-basedCSMPs operate through regional sitesthat are each managed by a director andcoordinated statewide by an executivedirector. Local teachers often serve assite co-directors.

A core feature of the CSMPs is theirextended, regional summer instituteswhich typically last three to four weeksand attract approximately 50 teachers perregion. Other CSMP activities includeSaturday workshops during the schoolyear, leadership academies, teacherresearch groups, and newsletters. Itseems that most teachers enter theprogram through their involvement in asummer institute. In some cases,teachers are paid to attend theseinstitutes; in other cases, they areawarded college credit, which advancesthem on the salary schedule. TheCSMPs focus almost entirely on peda-gogy and content. The CSMPs have hadan important "spin-Off' effect: support-ing teachers as leaders, both inside andoutside their classrooms and schools. Itis estimated that 20 percent of allCalifornia teachers have been involvedin some type of CSMP activity.

The state also has establishedregional Professional DevelopmentConsortia to assist in brokering profes-sional development, based on the needsof the districts they serve. There are tenregionally located Professional Develop-ment Consortia in California.

The SEA Office of ProfessionalDevelopment is a small administrativemechanism with four full-time staff thatoversees the BTSA Program, the Bilin-gual Teacher Training Program (seebelow), the Comprehensive TeacherEducation Institutes (see below), andspecial grants programs to provideteacher training. This office is respon-sible for scheduling bimonthly meetingswith directors of the Professional Devel-opment Consortia. It also workscollaboratively with the CSMPs.

The Bilingual Teacher TrainingProgram (BTTP) was established by thelegislature in 1981 to assist districts inproviding specialized staff developmenttraining for non-bilingual licensed teach-ers who work under waiver agreements

in classrooms with limited Englishproficiency (LEP) students. Thirteenbilingual teacher preparation centers,housed within county offices, wereestablished to provide training in teach-ing methods for English-language acqui-sition. BTTP is designed to assistteachers in obtaining CLAD certifica-tion, which authorizes them to teach LEPstudents, and/or BCLAD certification,which allows them to teach in bilingualclassrooms. Participating teachers un-dergo an extensive curriculum thatenables them to understand the cultureand history of a particular languagegroup, apply appropriate methods andstrategies when teaching LEP students,and, for BCLAD certification, acquire asecond language. Program activities arefunded by the state with matching andin-kind support from participating dis-tricts and county offices. Since itsinception, approximately 20,000 teachershave participated in BTTP.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The California Alliance forMathematics and Science (CAMS) isfunded by a five-year Statewide Sys-temic Initiative grant from the NationalScience Foundation. CAMS is centeredaround two major content-based net-works. Mathematics Renaissance (MR)is working to improve mathematicsinstruction in hundreds of California'spublic middle schools. The CaliforniaScience Implementation Network (CSIN)is assisting elementary teachers in theteaching of high-quality science. Bothnetworks are designed to facilitate theuse of the mathematics and scienceframeworks by teachers. The strength ofthese initiatives seems to lie in theirteacher networks and the intensivesummer professional development expe-riences that these networks provide toteachers.

California also receives federal Goals2000 funds. In 1994-95, the stateawarded Goals 2000 subgrants, whichfunded 169 consortia representing ap-proximately 1,600 schools. In 1995-96,75 percent of Goals 2000 funds wastargeted for staff development in read-ing.

Various foundations, located insideand outside California, are involved withprofessional development projects at thelocal level. The Rockefeller and Pan-asonic Foundations are assisting SanDiego Schools with their service deliverysystem, and the Galef Institute worksthroughout California supporting thework of primary teachers with coaching,mentoring, and in-class and out-of-classassistance. The Annenberg Foundationis supporting large reform initiatives inthe Bay Area and in Los Angeles Countythat include extensive professional de-velopment.


State Funds. In 1995-96, the stateallocated approximately $15 million forSB1882 initiatives$11.2 million for theCSMPs and $5.2 million for the Profes-sional Development Consortia. Otherstate allocations in that year for profes-sional development included $68 millionfor the mentor teacher program, $5million for the BTSA Program, $1.2million for the BTTP, and $800,000 forthe Comprehensive Teacher EducationInstitutes.

The CTC annually awards stategrants of $6.5 million for teacherinternship programs and $1.5 million forCareer Ladder Programs in teaching.

While California does not providecategorical funds for professional devel-opment at the district level, the state diddistribute over $300 million during 1995-96 for school improvementencourag-ing, but not requiring, that the funds beused for professional development.

Federal Funds. Goals 2000 fundingtotaled $10,524,929 in 1994, $42,111,705in 1995, and $39,246,198 in 1996. In

1995, California received $23,274,800 inEisenhower funds for professional de-velopment and over $800 million in Title Ifunds.

Local Funds. There is no require-ment for districts to support professionaldevelopment with local funds. The ma-jority of professional development ex-penses at the local level is incurredthrough the provision of substitutes andstipends.


As a matter of state policy, districtsare not required to design or implement alocal professional development plan.Since 1977, the state has authorized thatup to eight non-instructional days maybe incorporated into the school-yearcalendar. Most districts use four or fiveof those days for professional develop-ment. Non-instructional days, alsoreferred to as "school improvementprogram days," are funded by the state.


The terms and conditions for profes-sional development are determinedthrough local bargaining agreements.Salary schedules are generally deter-mined based on years of experience andadditional college credit earned beyondthe bachelor's degree, such as continu-ing education units, the master's degree,and the master's degree plus 30 credits.


The involvement of teacher organi-zations in the provision of professionaldevelopment appears to vary widelyfrom district to district. Teacherorganizations offer workshops and othertraining opportunities to help teacherswith shared governance issues andclassroom management, among othertopics.

Comprehensive Teacher EducationInstitutes represent partnerships be-tween the education programs of publiccolleges and school districts. Thirteenpartnerships have been formed.

BEST COPY AVAILABL


Walter Denham, ManagerProfessional Development OfficeCalifornia Department of Education721 Capitol MallSacramento, CA 95814916-657-2768

David WrightDirectorProfessional Services DivisionCommission on Teacher Credentialing1812 Ninth StreetSacramento, CA 95814916-445-8097

Robert PolkinghornDirector, Academic CollaborativesOffice of the PresidentUniversity of California300 Lakeside Drive, 18th FloorOakland, CA 94612-3550510-987-9505

1 Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures arefor 1993.





33

CPRE Teacher Professional Development Profile

ColoradoEducation Policy Context

Colorado's 192 public schooldistricts enroll 620,000 students.Education policy is generally

made at the local level, althoughColorado is currently implementing astate-level education reform initiativebased on standards for student achieve-ment. The 1993 Standards and Assess-ment Act established a nine-memberStandards and Assessment Develop-ment and Implementation (SADI) Coun-cil charged with establishing academiccontent standards and recommendingteacher professional development re-sources in support of the standards. TheSADI Council has adopted rigorousproficiency standards and new assess-ments in math, science, reading, writing,history, and geography. Adoption ofthe state-developed standards or locallydeveloped standards that equal orexceed them was intended to take placelocally between January of 1995 andJanuary of 1997.

Colorado passed the Educator Li-censure Act in 1991. This law estab-lished a three-tiered licensing systemrequiring teachers to meet performancestandards in order to move from aprovisional license (tier one) to aprofessional license (tier two), and thento a master teacher certificate (tier three).The Act also requires new teachers toparticipate in an induction program witha mentor. Full implementation of the new



recertification requirements is expectedby 1999.


The Colorado state government hasbeen addressing professional develop-ment for teachers through the SADICouncil. The state is also attempting toimprove coordination among the variousteacher development efforts in Colorado.

The Education Licensure Act cre-ated two standards boards, one forteachers and one for administrators.These boards have the authority torecommend regulations for licensure. Inaddition, a subcommittee of the SADICouncil, called the Subcommittee forProfessional Development, has workedwith the Colorado Staff DevelopmentCouncil to develop model professionaldevelopment plans that districts canimplement locally. These model planswere intended to be completed by Aprilof 1995.

Teacher Certification Policies.When fully implemented, the EducatorLicensure Act will dramatically changeteacher certification requirements inColorado. New teachers will have topass a written assessment and partici-pate in a three-year induction programunder the guidance of a mentor. Theinduction program will also providetraining in standards-based education.New teachers, as a part of their

performance evaluation, will participatein peer observation and coachingactivities. They have a three-yearprovisional certificate during their induc-tion period. After the induction program,they become eligible for a professionallicense.

Under the Educator Licensure Act,professional or career teachers mustmeet specific performance standards tomaintain their licenses. In the past,recertification was based on the numberof credit hours earned. Under the newsystem, teachers have to demonstratehigh levels of competence in academicsubjects and familiarity with statecontent and assessment standards.Teachers who demonstrate an advancedlevel of competence in teaching, admin-istration, or special services will beeligible for master teacher certification.Professional teachers must renew theirlicenses every five years. Masterteachers renew their licenses everyseven years.

State-Supported Programs. In1993, the state received a $10,000 grantfrom the National Governor's Associa-tion to convene a Working Group onProfessional Development to assist theSADI Council in its professional devel-opment work. The Working Group wasestablished in May of 1994. The groupconsists of 24 representatives from manyof the state's education organizationsand related professional organizations.The Governor's Office hired a consultant

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

4

to staff this project. The Working Grouphas completed a survey of local schooldistricts regarding their professionaldevelopment services and their teach-ers' knowledge of standards-basededucation. The Working Group pre-sented recommendations for best prac-tices in teacher professional develop-ment to the SADI Council and to thestate's Board of Education. To date, nospecific action has been taken regardingthe recommendations. Information aboutsuccessful practices was disseminatedwidely among local superintendents.Currently, there is a new committeeinvolving the state Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) and theGovernor's Office that is exploring thecreation of a statewide plan for profes-sional development.

The SEA has created a Standards-Based Education Professional Develop-ment Task Force (SBEPDT) to focus onprofessional development policy issues.The SBEPDT is identifying models ofeffective professional development thatare consistent with standards-basedgoals, and is coordinating work with thatof the SADI Council's subcommittee onprofessional development and the stateWorking Group. The SADI Council willreview the research literature on profes-sional development programs and ser-vices appropriate to implementing stan-dards-based education. This informa-tion will be housed in a resource banklocated at the SEA and accessible tolocal districts.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Colorado is participating inother initiatives related to professionaldevelopment. The federal New Stan-dards Project provides training in perfor-mance assessment strategies, and theStatewide Systemic Initiative (calledCONNECT in Colorado) supported bythe National Science Foundation, whichprovides professional development op-portunities for teachers in math andscience. Colorado is also an Re:Learningstate.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state budget dedicated to profes-sional development. The Standards andAssessment and the Educator Licensurelaws did not appropriate funds forprofessional development for teachers.However, there is school finance legisla-tion pending that would require localdistricts to set aside funds for profes-sional development activities. Currently,no such requirement exists. The billwould provide $10 million for profes-sional development grants to be awardedaccording to criteria set by the stateWorking Group on professional devel-opment.

Federal Funds. Colorado receivesGoals 2000 and Eisenhower funding forprofessional development. In FY 1995,Colorado received $2,934,164 inEisenhower funds.

Local Funds. Local funding is thelargest source of professional develop-ment funds. There is currently no statemandate for a minimum amount to bebudgeted for professional development.


The 1993 survey conducted by thestate Working Group on ProfessionalDevelopment revealed wide disparitiesin expenditures for teacher professionaldevelopment among the districts. Ex-penditures ranged from a minimum of$500 per year in small districts to amaximum of $350,000 in very largedistricts. Responsibility for planningprofessional development activities var-ied between the district office andschool-level personnel.

The Standards and Assessment Acthas been implemented by local districtsin different ways. Some districts dismissstudents early one day each week toprovide time for teacher professionaldevelopment. Other districts have done

little or nothing. Local districts areexpected to adopt new standards by1997 and to select appropriate profes-sional development programs. Eachdistrict must submit a professionaldevelopment plan to the state by 1997.Development, implementation, and de-livery of professional development pro-grams will be handled by school districtsin conjunction with their affiliatedBoards of Cooperative Educational Ser-vices (BOCES).


Professional development is some-times addressed in local bargainingagreements. Local units usually bargainfor release time and salary increments forprofessional development activities.

When district resources allow, teach-ers may be reimbursed for professionaldevelopment costs, such as tuition ortravel expenses. In some districts,teachers receive increases on the salaryschedule for completing credit hours inuniversity courses. Local districtsdetermine what professional develop-ment activities merit salary increases;however, these credit hours currently donot have to be linked to teachingassignments. Occasionally, teachersreceive stipends for professional devel-opment activities.


The Colorado Education Associa-tion (CEA) informs state policy indifferent ways. The CEA supportedboth key pieces of reform legislation,serving on state committees that helpeddevelop the legislation and the criteria toimplement it. At the request of districtsor individual teachers, the CEA providesprofessional development workshopsfor local districts in the areas oflicensure, standards, and inclusion forspecial education students.

Privately sponsored programs havehelped to develop teacher networksacross district lines in Colorado. Theseinclude the Colorado Staff DevelopmentCouncil and the Colorado Partnership forEducation Renewal.

In addition to their other functions,BOCES serve as regional resourcecenters for districts and provide profes-sional development for teachers. BOCESare responsible for managing the newteacher induction program at the locallevel and preparing teachers for licenserenewal.

The Colorado Staff DevelopmentCouncil is a statewide group for staffdevelopers in all of the state's districtsand university personnel who provideprofessional development to districts.Its primary function is serving as asource of professional support for itsmembers. This organization is repre-sented on state-level professional devel-opment committees and has been in-volved in most of Colorado's state-levelprofessional development initiatives.

Institutions of higher educationprovide professional development forteachers. The University of NorthernColorado provides district staff trainingin the development of enrichmentprograms in math and science. TheUniversity of Colorado at Denver main-tains close ties and provides staffdevelopment to its local district. All 12state institutions of higher educationinvolved in CONNECT are working withdistricts to implement math and sciencestandards.

Eagle Rock is a residential highschool and teacher training facilityestablished in 1983 by the AmericanHonda Corporation. Its ProfessionalDevelopment Center provides continu-ing education through its workshops,research projects, conferences, andpublications. Other important profes-sional development resources not sup-ported by the state include: the LiteracyLeague, founded by the Public Educa-tion Coalition, which provides mentorsto teachers; Partners in Science, foundedby the Colorado Alliance for Science in

1991, which provides science teacherswith summer jobs in science-relatedindustries; and the Aesthetic EducationInstitute of Colorado, sponsored byColorado Young Audiences, whichoffers elementary teachers a summerprogram focused on arts education.


Gene CampbellDirector of Teacher Certification andEducationColorado Department of Education201 East Colfax AvenueDenver, CO 80203303-866-6851

Bill PorterDirector of PolicyGovernor's Office136 State CapitolDenver, CO 80203303-866-4666

Frank JohnsonDirector of Professional DevelopmentColorado Education Association1500 Grant StreetDenver, CO 80203303-837-1500






3

' 111 -

ConnecticutEducation Policy Context

Connecticut's public K-12 systemconsists of 166 school districtsand serves over 500,000 stu-

dents. On average, communities fund 56percent of local education costs. There-fore, local districts are strongly indepen-dent and have considerable autonomy indecisions regarding curriculum. Statepolicy makers provide leadership bysetting the visions for education reformat the state level, giving local decisionmakers encouragement and support tohelp them move in the desired direction.The centerpiece of Connecticut's reformefforts is the Common Core of Learning(CCL), adopted by the Connecticut StateBoard of Education (SBE) in 1987, whichoutlines the essential skills and learningobjectives for grades K-12. Districtsvoluntarily adhere to these objectives,which are written in general terms and arenot subject-matter specific. Attempts tocreate state curriculum standards thatare more specific and regulatory innature have been met by substantialpublic opposition. However, stateframeworks have been developed toprovide guidance for local curriculumdevelopment.

Standards for teacher performanceand professional growth also haveprovided an impetus for achievingeducation reform goals. In 1986, thenGovernor William A. O'Neill signed intolaw the Connecticut Education Enhance-



ment Act (EEA), which aimed to attract,educate, induct, and retain high-qualityteachers. The EEA was based onrecommendations from the Governor'sEquity in Educational Excellence Com-mission, which met from 1984 throughmid-1985 to examine and propose regula-tions for teaching standards. While thislegislation is best-known for making thesalaries of Connecticut public schoolteachers the highest in the nation, itsmission goes much further. Throughinitiatives such as the Beginning Educa-tor Support and Training (BEST) Pro-gram, Connecticut policy makers havecreated a system that provides supportand assessment for beginning teachersand incentives for experienced teachersto engage in an ongoing process ofprofessional growth.


The EEA called for a "professionaldevelopment continuum" to upgradeteaching standards by strengtheningpreparation, certification, and profes-sional development programming at thestate and local levels. The EEA requiresbeginning teachers to participate in aprogram of induction, which provides afoundation in basic classroom teachingcompetencies and pedagogical theory.Beginning teachers must meet generalcompetency standards and pass aperformance-based assessment in order

to move forward on the certificationcontinuum. To support professionalgrowth for continuing classroom teach-ers, districts must provide professionaldevelopment opportunities and awardcontinuing education units (CEUs),which teachers may then apply towardstheir recertification requirement. Inaddition, the state-operated Institutesfor Teaching and Learning (ITLs) pro-vide intensive training opportunities forteachers and administrators.

Teacher Certification Policies.Connecticut has an Advisory Councilfor Professional Teaching Standardsthat serves at the discretion of the SBE,Governor, and state legislature onmatters pertaining to teaching standardsand certification. There has been somediscussion and debate in recent yearsregarding the creation of a ProfessionalStandards Board that would haveauthority to set policy on issues oflicensure, education program accredita-tion, and teacher evaluation. Thus far,no such entity has been created.

Beginning teachers are issued atwo-year Initial Certificate during whichtime they must complete a teacherinduction program (see below). Suc-cessful completion of the inductionprogram leads to the Provisional Educa-tor Certificate, a non-renewable, eight-year certificate. After three years ofteaching experience and the completionof 30 semester hours beyond thebachelor's or master's degree, provi-

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Poliry Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

0.( BEST COPY AVAILABLE

sionally certified teachers may apply forthe Professional Educator Certificate. Inorder to maintain their ProfessionalEducator Certificate, teachers must accu-mulate nine CEUs every five years. OneCEU is awarded for every ten contacthours. In addition to tuition-free CEUworkshops provided by the district,teachers may select from an array ofcourses or workshops that are offered by150 other state-approved CEU providers,such as universities, regional educa-tional service centers, and businesses.

The BEST Program was introducedin 1989. Through BEST, beginningteachers are paired with veteran class-room teachers trained as mentors in theareas of peer coaching, team teaching,and using instructional resources. BESTalso provides new teachers with trainingin "teaching competencies" which areused to evaluate their performance. TheConnecticut Competency Instrument(CCI), designed by the state's Bureau ofResearch and Teacher Assessment andby Connecticut educators, allows atrained classroom observer to rankbeginning teachers' skills along tenindicators. The results of the classroomobservations are compiled and measuredagainst a performance standard (accept-able, conditional, unacceptable) which isthen used to determine a recommenda-tion for future teaching status. Newteachers must successfully complete theBEST Program in order to receive aprovisional certificate.

In 1992, the Connecticut StateDepartment of Education (referred tohereafter as the state education agency,or SEA) introduced a series of pilotstudies to develop and refine portfolioassessments, which would be used inconjunction with the CCI to measurebeginning teachers' teaching activities.This new assessment component fo-cuses on teachers' understanding ofconcepts specific to their instructionalcontent areas. Through its participationand leadership in national initiativessuch as the Interstate New TeacherAssessment and Support Consortium(INTASC) and the National ScienceFoundation's Statewide Systemic Initia-tive Project, Connecticut has developeda discipline-based teacher performanceevaluation that uses teaching portfolios

to evaluate beginner teachers' growth inspecific content areas. These modifica-tions are currently being implemented forsecondary teachers in science andmathematics. In 1995-96, pilot studies forart, music, and physical educationteachers were phased in; during 1996-97elementary and middle school teacherswill participate in the new evaluationprocess.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA oversees teacher certification andprofessional development activitiesthrough its Bureau of Certification andProfessional Development. The SEAhandles all application and processingprocedures required for teacher certifica-tion activities and is responsible forapproving all training programs that areeligible to award CEUs. The SEApublishes an annual listing of the morethan 150 providers in the state that offerCEU-approved workshops and courses.

Teacher assessment programs aremanaged through the Bureau of Re-search and Teacher Assessment. TheBureau of Curriculum and InstructionalPrograms offers statewide training semi-nars, local technical assistance, andresource publications on curriculumdevelopment and alignment across disci-plines. The SEA also sponsors theCooperating Teacher and Mentor Pro-gram, which provides training to experi-enced classroom teachers who serve asmentors for beginning teachers andsupport student teachers.

SEA staff manage the ITLs, whichare one- or two-week summer workshopsfor teachers and administrators. TheSEA also employs a cadre of curriculumand assessment specialists who providetechnical assistance to districts on siteand through statewide sessions con-ducted throughout the school year. Thestate collaborates with other profes-sional development providers and teacherorganizations located throughout thestate.

Connecticut's Regional EducationalService Centers (RESCs) have existedsince the mid-1960s. They respond tothe requests and needs of local districtsby offering technical assistance andtraining. Collectively known as theConnecticut Alliance, the six RESCseach serve, and are supported financially

by, a "cluster" of districts. The Alliancealso receives an annual state appropria-tion and numerous subcontracts fromthe SEA to conduct training activities forthe BEST and ITL programs. It isestimated that 10 percent of all teachers'professional development opportunitiesare conducted by these regional centers.

In 1995, the SEA introduced theUrban and Priority Schools Initiative,which provides additional state fundingto 14 school districts that serve largeconcentrations of at-risk students. Par-ticipating districts receive technicalassistance and funding support todevelop special programs in earlychildhood education, dropout preven-tion, parental involvement, and before-and after-school programs. Urban andPriority Schools grants range from$680,000 to $1.3 million, 7 percent ofwhich is set aside to support statewideand local professional development.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. A Statewide SystemicInitiative (SSI) grant from the NationalScience Foundation (NSF) supportsConnecticut's Project CONNSTRUCT,which offers teachers professional de-velopment opportunities in the areas ofmath and science. The over-arching goalof CONNSTRUCT is to make reforms inscience, mathematics, and technology ahigh priority for state and local policymakers. The project is managed by theConnecticut Academy for Education inScience, Mathematics, and Technology,which is a free-standing, non-profitorganization that serves as an advocateand catalyst for reform. The Academy iscollaborating with the SEA to developmath and science curriculum frameworksfor the state and is mobilizing policyofficials, business leaders, K-12 educa-tors, college educators, scientists, math-ematicians, civic groups, social serviceproviders, and education organizationsin support of a common reform vision inorder to develop a "professional commu-nity." From this group of leaders, theAcademy selects fellows to assistschool districts in understanding andutilizing the resources that are necessaryfor reform. While CONNSTRUCTtargets urban districts, approximately 54of the state's 166 districts have partici-pated in some way in this program.

CONNSTRUCT funds other major in-service providers, such as the Project toIncrease Mastery of Math and Scienceand Talcott Mountain, and has at-tempted to coordinate all professionaldevelopment activities in the state fund-ed by the NSF.

A portion of Goals 2000 funds isbeing used to support professionaldevelopment school initiatives thatfocus on teacher enhancement andschool improvement. Twenty-five uni-versity-district partnerships receivedsubgrants during 1994-95, and 75 newpartnerships received funding in 1995-96.


State Funds. The state does notprovide a categorical allocation to

support professional development ac-tivities at the local level (the EEA-authorized funding for this purpose waseliminated in 1992). Since 1984, statefunds have supported the ITLs. Fund-ing in recent years has been appropri-ated at the following levels: in 1994-95,$500,000; in 1995-96, $475,000; and in1996-97, $328,000. Although funding tosupport the BEST and CooperatingTeacher programs has declined consid-erably over the years, the 1995-96appropriation was $3.3 million.

Approximately 1.2 percent of thetotal state education budget is appropri-ated to support operating costs for thesix RESCs. The SEA allocated $25,000in 1995-96 (down from $100,000) tosupport the "Celebration of Excellence"teacher recognition program. The Urbanand Priority Schools Initiative wasallocated $16 million for 1996-97. Sevenpercent of the funds for this initiative isused to support professional develop-ment.

Federal Funds. Connecticut re-ceived a $2.3-million Eisenhower Pro-fessional Development grant for the1995-96 school year. ProjectCONNSTRUCT is supported primarilythrough a five-year, $7.8-million grantfrom the NSF. Approximately $120,000 inGoals 2000 subgrants have been awardedto support schools' professional devel-opment initiatives.

Local Funds. There is no mandatedset-aside for professional developmentfunding at the local level. Discretionaryuse of funds obtained through generalstate aid and federal sources allowdistricts to support their professionaldevelopment programs, should theychoose to do so. It is estimated thatdistricts spend up to 3 percent of theirbudgets on professional developmenta particular consequence of fiscalconstraints.


The EEA mandates that local dis-tricts provide 18 hours of CEUs per year,so that teachers can earn credits tomaintain or advance their teachingcertification, The content of profes-sional development programs is deter-mined at the local level. Thus, thefrequency, quality, and content of in-service activities vary across districts.

In 1993, legislation was passed(Public Act 93-353) requiring each localand regional board of education todevelop a comprehensive professionaldevelopment plan based on guidelinesissued by the SEA. Professionaldevelopment plans went into effectduring the 1994-95 school year. Theguidelines, issued in December of 1993,require districts to align professionaldevelopment with their local strategicplan's goals and to work with theteachers' union in creating the plan(although the plan does not require theunion's sign-off or approval). Districtscan participate in SEA-sponsored tech-nical assistance workshops to helpcreate their plans. Currently, the stateneither provides funding to implementdistrict plans, nor approves or monitorsthe plans.

The official school year calendardoes not set aside a minimum number ofin-service days. SEA officials reportthat, on average, local districts allocatethree to five days for teacher in-serviceactivities per year. District staff areconsidered to be the primary providersof teacher training at the local level (75percent), followed by RESCs and SEA

staff (10 percent each), and outsideconsultants (5 percent).


Teacher salaries are negotiated atthe local level. Salary enhancements areawarded based on years of experienceand advanced degrees earned. Seldomare enhancements assigned based onthe accumulation of CEUs. Most localteacher contracts include a provision fortuition reimbursement at an annual flatrate of $125.00 for coursework in whichthe teacher's final grade is "B" or better.This reimbursement policy does notapply if the teacher is earning creditstowards an advanced degree.


Teacher associations are a keysource of professional developmentopportunities. The Connecticut Educa-tion Association offers a statewideannual "Professional Development Day"and, throughout the year, providestechnical assistance and training to localdistricts. Services to local sites areavailable upon request and are offeredfree of charge. Teaching networks, suchas the Association for Teachers ofMathematics in Connecticut (ATOMIC)and the Foreign Language TeachersAssociation, have been cited as leadersin promoting collegial forums andprofessional growth opportunities forteachers.

The private sector also has providedresources to stimulate teacher recogni-tion and professional growth.Connecticut's major telephone serviceprovider, Southern New England Tele-phone (SNET), sponsors the Celebrationof Excellence program, which rewardsinnovation in curriculum development.Each year, approximately 100 teachersare recognized and invited to attend aSummer Institute to work with pastcelebrants on design strategies todisseminate their innovative curriculumideas to other school sites. "AdaptorGrants" of $400 are available to teachers

3

who are interested in implementingcelebrants' curriculum ideas in their ownclassrooms. The Celebration of Excel-lence is funded by SNET with supple-mental support from the SEA. AlthoughSNET will no longer serve as a sponsorafter the 1995-96 year, the SEA expects tocontinue this program through supportfrom other private sources. A secondwell-known teacher recognition programis the Milken Family Foundation Educa-tor Award, which provides unrestrictedawards of $25,000 to five Connecticutpublic school educators (three teachersand two administrators) each year. Pastand present recipients participate in anannual education conference to stimu-late ongoing professional developmentand networking opportunities.

There are several professional de-velopment school models currentlyoperating in the state. Working with theHartford School District, the Universityof Connecticut is implementing a five-year program. Connecticut College,Southern Connecticut State, and Con-necticut Central State University alsohave established partnerships withschool districts that provide studentteachers with an intensive, school-basedlearning experience. Postsecondaryinstitutions, in turn, offer continuingteachers opportunities to participate inthe design and implementation of collegecourses, workshops, and seminars.

The Connecticut Alliance for ArtsEducation, in conjunction with theConnecticut Commission on the Artsand the SEA, sponsors the Higher OrderThinking (HOT) Schools of ConnecticutProgram. HOT Schools participate in afive-day residential summer institute toexamine the role of the arts in integratedcurriculum and to develop arts-inte-grated projects for the classroom.Currently, teachers and administrators atsix HOT Schools sites participate in threestaff development workshops and areprovided a 15-day artist-in-residencecomponent. HOT Schools teachers arebeing trained as in-service leaders andwill eventually be assigned to assistother schools in their regions to developintegrated curriculum projects. Allteachers and principals receive CEUs forHOT Schools training.


Betty SternbergAssociate CommissionerDivision of Teaching and LearningConnecticut Department of Education165 Capitol Avenue, Room 305State Office BuildingHartford, CT 06106-1630860-566-8113

Abigail HughesChiefBureau of Certification and ProfessionalDevelopmentConnecticut Department of Education165 Capitol AvenueState Office BuildingHartford, CT 06106-1630860-566-2117

Daria PlummerPresidentConnecticut Education Association21 Oak Street, Suite 500Hartford, CT 06106-8001860-525-5641


The Other Side of the Equation: Impactof the Teacher Standards Provisions ofthe Education Enhancement Act. Stateof Connecticut Board of Education(1992).

Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures are

for 1993.

-t 40






DelawareEducation Policy Context

Delaware is a small state with apublic K-12 system organizedinto 19 districts, three of which

are vocational/technical school districtsserving grades 9-12 only. Among its 182schools, the state enrolls approximately110,000 students per year. In 1992, theState Board of Education (SBE) andDepartment of Public Instruction (re-ferred to hereafter as the state educationagency, or SEA) launched a standards-based reform initiative called "NewDirections for Education in Delaware,"which sought to give local systemsgreater autonomy and control overschool improvement designs. The focuswas to transform public education inthree main areas: content standards;performance-based assessment; and de-regulation. Definitions and measures ofwhat students should know and be ableto do are determined at the state level;local systems have the flexibility in thechoice of curriculum and instructionused to reach learner goals.

The curriculum frameworks for math-ematics, science, English/language arts,and social studies were adopted in Juneof 1995 by the SBE. Delaware then beganto build a new state assessment thatincorporated performance-based mea-sures in reading, writing, and mathemat-ics. Framework commissions are nowengaged in developing content stan-



dards in the visual and performing arts,foreign languages, agricultural science,and finance, business, and marketing forapproval by the SBE in June of 1997.Additional commissions in vocationaleducation and comprehensive schoolwellness are planned. Each 45-membercommission includes representation fromevery district, and is co-chaired by eithera teacher or university faculty memberand a business representative.

Concurrent with these reform ef-forts, the Business/Public EducationCouncil engaged in their own analysis ofDelaware's educational system andissued a "Gap Analysis Report" in 1993.Governor Carper formed a 26-memberEducation Improvement Commission(EIC) in August of 1994 to develop anoverall strategy to merge the recommen-dations from both initiatives into onecoherent, cost-effective plan addressinggovernance and accountability, finance,and communications. The EIC finalreport, issued in September of 1995,called for creation of a "decentralizededucation system" that would locatedecision making at the school-buildinglevel and use a high-stakes accountabil-ity process of incentives and monitoringsupport. During the 1996 session, theGeneral Assembly passed legislation insupport of charter schools and schoolchoice, site-based management, andschool finance reform.


Delaware has established profes-sional development standards for publicschool educators. The "Elements ofQuality Professional Development" weredeveloped through the collaborativeefforts of the SEA, the DelawareEducation Research and DevelopmentCenter (University of Delaware), theCenter for School Change (DelawareState University), and the DelawareStatewide Systemic Initiative (SSI). Theevaluation system developed to investi-gate practice in relation to theseelements is being used throughout thestate and nation.

Teacher Certification Policies. Cur-rently, entry-level teachers are issued aStandard Certificate, which is valid forfive years. After three years ofconsecutive teaching experience, ateacher is eligible to advance to theProfessional Status Certificate, which isalso valid for five years. Renewalrequirements are the same for bothcertificates; teachers must have threeconsecutive years of experience in theirarea of certification and six semesterhours of college coursework.

The Professional Standards Council(PSC) was formed in 1991 to research andidentify professional competency stan-dards for Delaware teachers and todevelop an education plan for certifica-

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

tion and career development. The 21-member PSC advises the SBE and iscomprised of representatives from theSEA, district- and school-level staff(including eight classroom teachers),institutions of higher education, statelegislators, the Governor's Office, andparent associations. PSC members areappointed to two-year terms by the statesuperintendent from nominations oftheir respective groups.

In December of 1993, PSC intro-duced the Educational Plan for Certifica-tion and Career Development, a three-tier

continuum of preservice education, theinduction of new teachers, and careerdevelopment for experienced teachers.The plan links teacher preparation andprofessional development activities tothe state's goals for student learning.Under the certification regulations pro-posed by PSC, beginning teacherswould be issued a three-year initiallicense and would have to participate inan induction program. The requirementsfor the Professional Certificate would beperformance-based. This approachmeasures teacher performance to ensure

Elements of Quality Professional Development

Appropriate Contentincorporates content knowledge and research-validated practices that supportdemanding content standards;links new knowledge to the prior knowledge of participants;delivers content appropriate to the needs of participants.

Ongoing and Sustainedlong-range in nature, recognizes that learning is incremental and needs to be supportedover time;sustained as a coherent effort for a minimum of 2-3 years and not consisting of singleevents, weekend conferences, or activities that recur over a year with differentpeople.

Active Engagementallows participants to experience through first-hand and active engagement thecurriculum, pedagogy, or assessment activities that serve as a model of what needs tooccur in the classroom;consists of activities that are inquiry-based, varied, and engaging.

Collegialstructured to serve teams of professionals that work together on real work;involves developing curriculum, problem solving, reflection about pedagogy, thedevelopment of a common language, and engagement in reciprocal observation andfeedback.

Job-Embeddedembedded in the routine organization of the school day and year and viewed asintegral to school functioning;requires participants to plan and reflect upon their professional activities and practice.

Systemic Perspectiveincorporates all groups involved in the education of children;includes all parts of the system that have a role and responsibility in the changeprocess and must shift practice in concert with each other.

Client-Focused and Adaptivebased on the interests and needs of the participants and the schools they serve;based on formal analyses of needs;demonstrates a balance between the support for institutional initiatives and for thoseinitiated by participants.

Incorporates Reflectionprovides time for participants to analyze and reflect, with opportunities for infusionof new information as well as criticism and guidance from external sources;enables participants to challenge, enhance, and make connections to practice.

42

competency in pedagogy, subject areaand the use of standards-based as-sessment.

Districts interested in implement-ing mentoring programs for newteachers have been able to receivestate subgrants since 1994-95. Thesefunds may be used for mentor training,mentor and new teacher stipends, andsubstitutes to provide time for obser-vations and conferences. Eight dis-tricts participated in this programduring 1995-96, and all 19 districts areexpected to be involved by 1997-98.The PSC is revising it recertificationproposal, and legislative action isanticipated during 1997-98. Teacherstandards drafted by the PSC havereceived preliminary approval from theSBE and are undergoing public reviewduring 1996-97.

State-Supported Programs. Toimprove state management and sup-port of reform activities, the SEA wasreorganized into four branches: Ad-ministrative Services, Standards andCurriculum, Assessment and Account-ability, and Improvement and Assis-tance. SEA-sponsored professionaldevelopment activities are coordinatedby the Standards and CurriculumBranch. Participation in SEA trainingevents is usually voluntary, although amandatory statewide in-service pro-gram is occasionally implemented.SEA involvement with national reforminitiatives such as Statewide SystemicInitiatives (SSIs), New Standards,Re:Learning, and INTASC has fosteredthe development of leadership cadresamong local educators in performanceassessment, school-based planning,teacher portfolios, and other areas.

The Delaware Teacher Center wasstarted by a regional cluster of districts(Kent-Sussex) in 1981 with a U.S.Department of Education grant; it hasevolved into a statewide, state-fundedorganization. The Teacher Center'manages eight regional professionaldevelopment centers. Teacher repre-sentatives from all 19 districts partici-pate on the Teacher Center's govern-ing/policy board, which also includesSEA staff and representatives ofinstitutions of higher education. TheCenter provides an estimated 450 in-

service workshops each year, freeinstructional materials and supplies, on-loan equipment, and a professional homewhere teachers share new ideas. TheCenter's Policy Board is actively en-gaged in the education reform networkand disseminates quarterly updatesthrough its professional developmentcenters.

The Delaware Center for Educa-tional Technology (DCET) was formed in1995 to create a modern educationaltechnology infrastructure in Delaware'spublic schools. In collaboration with theSEA, the Center provides workshops inthe summer and throughout the year.DCET plans to train approximately 20percent of school staff, who will supportthe rest of the faculty.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Goals 2000 funds supportlocal curriculum development activities.The SEA provides technical assistanceto ensure that curricula are aligned withstate standards. Carl D. Perkins fundssupport statewide training for secondaryteachers in the applied physics curricu-lum.

Project 21 is Delaware's SSI, whichis supported by a grant from the NationalScience Foundation. Project 21 activi-ties, implemented in 34 schools, focusedon assisting teachers in developingcurriculum and using existing curriculumresources that are consistent with statestandards for mathematics and science.Teachers attended two-week summerinstitutes: school teams representing all34 sites also convened at various pointsduring the school year. Project 21 staffserved as specialists in curriculuminstruction and assessment and workedon-site with school staff and throughteacher networks. Professionals from150 schools have participated in Project21. The project has influenced statepolicy and practice by facilitating thedesign of professional developmentstandards and modeling current thinkingabout effective professional develop-ment practice.

Delaware has been involved since1992 with the New Standards Project(NSP), a national standards-based cur-riculum and assessment developmentproject sponsored by the NationalCenter on Education and the Economy

and funded by The MacArthur Founda-tion and The Pew Charitable Trusts. NSPhas provided teacher training on devel-opment, application, and scoring ofperformance-based assessments, and onlinking Delaware state content standardswith those of other states.


State Funds. The legislature hasappropriated $2 million to support localcurriculum development efforts linked tocontent standards. The non-competitivegrant funds may be used for training,planning, in-service programs, and con-tractual services related to curriculumdevelopment. The average grant awardwas $250 per FTE during 1995-96 and$317 per FTE for 1996-97. The EICrecommended that the state establish apermanent set-aside in its educationbudget for professional development.

Competitive state grants supportedlocal beginning teacher mentoring pro-grams with $140,000 in 1995-96. Thestate spends about $500,000 per year toprovide teachers free summer tuition andtuition reimbursement. Roughly $600,000is allocated annually to support ateacher-to-teacher cadre that dissemi-nates best practice methods. Other statefunds for teacher professional develop-ment in 1996-97 include: $286,000 for theDelaware Teacher Center; $105,000 forthe Delaware Institute for Arts inEducation; and $175,000 for the Centerfor Educational Technology.

Federal Funds. In 1995-96, Delawarereceived a $1.24 million Goals 2000 grantand a $1 million Eisenhower grant. Bothgrants primarily support professionaldevelopment.

Local Funds. Districts rely heavilyon state and federal funds to supportlocal professional development. Localfunding of professional development isat the discretion of the district and variesconsiderably across the state. The PSChas recommended that districts berequired to allocate local funds fortraining materials, consultants, and trans-portation related to professional devel-opment activities.

43


To receive state funds for curricu-lum development, districts must submit aplan describing the staff development tobe conducted. Every district is assignedan SEA liaison who provides technicalassistance. Twice a year, districtssubmit status reports to the SEA on theircurriculum development activities. Dis-tricts must allocate five days each yearfor teacher in-service activities. Both theEIC and PSC recommend increasing thisminimum to give teachers additional timeto learn, plan, and implement newstrategies.

A few districts offer teachers theoption of participating in a voluntaryPersonalized Inservice Program (PIP).The conditions of the PIP are determinedlocally through collective bargaining.PIP provisions generally allow individualteachers to pursue professional devel-opment programs on their own instead ofattending a district or state in-serviceday.


Delaware's state salary schedule(which accounts for 70 percent of ateacher's total salary) awards a stepincrease for a master's degree. Since1976, Delaware teachers have been ableto earn salary increments for participa-tion in Professional Growth Programs(PGP). Teachers may earn PGP creditthrough graduate study, undergraduatestudy, in-service credit, or individualgrowth credits. In 1992, the SBE createdthe State Inservice Review Committee toensure that professional developmentopportunities for PGP credits meetquality standards. In-service courseproposals submitted by an individual,district, or agency must be approved bythe committee as "relevant and usable."PGP credit is based on an equitableconversion formula representing semes-ter, continuing education unit, or contacthours earned. One credit is awarded forevery 15 contact hours of in-serviceactivities; one-fifth credit is awarded for

every three contact hours completed.Teachers advance one step (approxi-mately $800) on the state salary scale forevery 15 credits earned.

Teachers may apply for tuitionreimbursement from the state for coursestaken during the school year. Teachersmay attend summer school courses freeof charge at any public postsecondaryinstitution in Delaware which is paid forby special appropriation and the institu-tions of higher education. PSC isdeveloping models for teacher recogni-tionincluding incentives such as sal-ary increases, release time, and class-room resourcesearned for achievingdegrees, National Board Certification,and other professional milestones.


The Delaware State Education As-sociation (DSEA) offers courses andworkshops during the school year. Theannual three-day Summer LeadershipAcademy features a full day of in-servicecourses. DSEA is exploring creation of aprofessional development institute thatwould permit participants to earn gradu-ate credits toward an advanced degree.DSEA recently became a co-sponsor ofthe Delaware Teacher Center.

The Delaware Education Researchand Development Center was estab-lished in 1993 by the University ofDelaware and the SEA. The Centerserves as a think tank, providingexpertise in shaping state standards,professional development, teacher as-sessment, curriculum design, and educa-tional finance. Center activities focus onfive areas: support of school efforts toreform curriculum, teaching, and assess-ment; data-driven decision making;studies, analyses, and publications;evaluation of systemic reform; and adhoc evaluation support to districts andschools. The Center is primarily fundedby the Delaware Business/Public Educa-tion Council, with supplementary sup-port from federal, state, and privatesources.

The University of Delaware Collegeof Education has been a member of theHolmes Partnership since 1985. TheUniversity has established professional

development schools (PDS) in partner-ship with several districts, includingAppoquinimink, Christina, and Milford.The PDS sites serve teacher educationprograms in the same manner thatteaching hospitals serve medical educa-tion. The University offers studentteaching and clinical partnerships in theNew Castle County and Cecil County,Maryland, districts. The College ofEducation and the Educational TestingService have pioneered since 1988 theuse of Praxis 3 tests in a studentteaching format.


Valerie WoodruffAssociate State Superintendent forImprovement and AssistanceDepartment of Public InstructionP.O. Box 1402Dover, DE 19903-1402302-739-3772

Bill BarkleyExecutive SecretaryDelaware Professional StandardsCouncilDepartment of Public InstructionP.O. Box 1402Dover, DE 19903-1402302-739-4686

Paul LeMahieuDirectorDelaware Education and ResearchDevelopment CenterUniversity of Delaware and the DelawareDepartment of Public InstructionNewark, DE 19716302-831-4433

I Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures are

for 1993.

44





CpRE Teacher Professional Development Profile

District of Columbia

Education Policy Context

District of Columbia operates apublic school system comprisedof 164 schools, serving approxi-

mately 80,000 students annually. In1991, the District of Columbia PublicSchools (DCPS) launched a reforminitiative, bringing together educators,business leaders, and community mem-bers to prepare a local Goals 2000 plan.In June of 1992, the DCPS released thereport, Building Learning Communi-ties: A Framework for Preparing Stu-dents for the 21st Century, whichpresented a vision of school restructur-ing grounded in the philosophy of"learning communities." The report alsoidentified areas for improvement: earlychildhood education; curriculum reformand learner outcomes; mathematics,science, and technology education;graduation requirements; arts apprecia-tion; parental involvement; and schoolaccountability.

To implement this new vision, in1994 the DCPS developed a strategicplan, entitled "Bringing EducationalServices to Students" (BESST). BESSTfocuses on three areas: (1) performance-based education; (2) shared decisionmaking; and (3) staff development. Theprimary thrust of BESST is to grantschools autonomy and decision-makingauthority and to shift the central office'srole to that of facilitator and resourceprovider. A performance-based system



was launched in 1994 through a five-yearCurriculum Renewal Initiative to developcurriculum frameworks and a new stu-dent assessment system. The frame-works are being developed under theguidance of a 24-member CurriculumCoordinating Council (CCC), which iscomposed of classroom teachers, princi-pals, and SEA staff. A school-basedmanagement system is also beingimplemented, with the establishment ofLocal School Restructuring Teams(LSRT) at each school. The teams arecomprised of administrators, teachers,parents, students, support staff, andcommunity representatives.

Extensive reforms lie ahead for theDCPS. In 1995, the U.S. Congresscreated the District of Columbia Finan-cial Responsibility and ManagementAssistance Authority (henceforth re-ferred to as the Authority) to repair theDistrict of Columbia's financial condi-tion and improve the managementeffectiveness of its governing agencies.The Authority issued a report inNovember 1996 entitled, Children inCrisis, which stated that DCPS wasfailing in its mission to educate children,citing low academic achievement, unsafeschools, poor leadership, and misman-agement. Shortly thereafter, the Author-ity approved the takeover of the DCPS,appointed a new superintendent, andcreated a nine-member board of trusteesto assume most of the responsibilities ofthe elected school board (which has

been reduced to an advisory role).DCPS's professional development ser-vices, as described below, reflect activi-ties as of December of 1996.


Capacity building and staff develop-ment are cornerstones of the district'seducational restructuring efforts. Toassist schools with the implementationof reforms, the DCPS's Center forSystemic Educational Change (CSEC)provides technical assistance to localschools and trains personnel in newstrategies and practices to improveoverall school performance. In addition,BESST refined DCPS's policy statementon employee development and trainingopportunities (which was first adoptedby the district's Board of Education in1980). The current policy states that:

There will be leadership training tofacilitate short-term planning, long-term planning, and the work of theLocal School Restructuring Teams.There will be opportunities to learnalone and in collaboration in"multilevel programs" in whichteachers, principals, district-leveleducators, and others jointly par-ticipate. There will be on-site studygroups focusing on topics of par-ticular interest to participants andcourse offerings with recertifica-

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Institute9n Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

45

tion and graduate credits attached.And there will be sustained supportand a building upon each step ofstaff development.

The DCPS approach to staff devel-opment consists of five components: (1)required courses; (2) optional courses;(3) learner-initiated professional devel-opment projects; (4) distance learning;and (5) leadership training. Requiredcourses examine the definition, prin-ciples, purpose, and implementation ofperformance-based education. Optionalcourses include workshops, institutes,and other in-service activities thatteachers may select to enhance theirskills and knowledge base. Learner-initiated professional development sup-ports teachers' individual needs, basedon their overall professional growth plan(see below).

Teacher Certification and Policies.The Board of Education sets teachereducation and certification policies,which were last revised in 1993. Uponsuccessful completion of all preserviceand exam requirements, entry-level teach-ers are issued a Standard Certificate,which is valid for five years. Since 1995,first-year teachers have been required toattend a 45-hour orientation program,entitled "New Teacher Seminar Series:Teaching for the 21st Century." Thecourse is based on the five propositionsadvanced by the National Board forProfessional Teaching Standards(NBPTS) and provides teachers withinformation and strategies to organizeage-appropriate environments and lit-eracy programs in their classrooms. Thecourse is co-sponsored by the DCPS andthe Washington Teachers Union (WTU).Beginning teachers also receive supportfrom consulting teachers (see below),who are assigned to assist all teachers,including in particular those at thenovice level. In addition, principals areencouraged to assign experienced teach-ers as "buddies" to coach and guide newteachers.

After two years of satisfactoryclassroom experience, teachers are eli-gible for a five-year Professional Certifi-cate. Renewal requirements for theProfessional Certificate were introducedin 1980. Six semester hours are required

for renewal, which may be satisfiedthrough enrollment in college/universitycredit courses, DCPS-sponsored in-service courses, or (upon prior approval)participation in conferences, seminars,or workshops offered by other providersboth within and outside of the district.Teachers are required to implementindividual professional growth plansbased on the needs identified duringtheir annual evaluations.

In 1994-95, the DCPS participated inthe NBPTS Field Test Network, duringwhich 11 teachers piloted the first set ofNational Board Certification assess-ments. As of June, 1996, however, noDistrict of Columbia teachers wereBoard-certified.

State-Supported Programs. TheCenter for Systemic Educational Change(CSEC) is responsible for deliveringDCPS-sponsored professional develop-ment. Managed by a deputy superinten-dent, the CSEC consists of four resourcegroups that provide consulting, facilita-tion, and brokering services in responseto schools' needs.

The Organizational Culture/HumanResource Development and Training(OC/HRDT) Group oversees profes-sional development programming for thedistrict. OC/HRDT reviews all proposedin-service courses to ensure contentquality and consistency with systemicinitiatives. DCPS-sponsored profes-sional development activities include,but are not limited to, the followingexamples:

a required 45-hour course (equiva-lent to three in-service credits)entitled "Introduction to Perfor-mance-based Education" for teach-ers and administrators;

courses based on the Urban LearnerFramework, Dimensions of Learn-ing, and the Responsive Classroomfor K-3 and intermediate-grade teach-ers; and

a Professional Development Schoolat the secondary level that offersvisiting Teacher Fellows a five-weekintensive program to learn innova-tive instructional strategies, ob-serve master teachers, and develop

46

teaching materials using the newcurriculum frameworks.

Each year, the OC/HRDT publishesschool-year and summer catalogueslisting professional development oppor-tunities offered by the district, the WTU,and other providers, such as theKennedy Center and the SmithsonianInstitute. These catalogues describeover 100 courses, workshops, seminars,institutes, and teleconferences. Coursesare offered on both a fee and non-feebasis.

The CSEC's Curriculum Content,Instruction, and Assessment Groupcoordinates curriculum renewal activi-ties and is staffed by teams of consult-ants with expertise in early, middle, andsenior school learning environments.Started in 1990, the Early ChildhoodProfessional Development team pro-vides teacher institutes, collaborativeforums, teacher cadres, demonstrationsites, summer action labs, and consult-ing teachers. The Middle Learning YearsTeam is providing training to staff atthree middle schools in the areas ofinterdisciplinary teaming, flexible sched-uling, small learning communities, ex-ploratory programs, and student-cen-tered learning. At the high school level,five professional development schoolsare being established; visiting teacherswill learn innovative instructional strate-gies and observe successful teachers.

In addition, elementary and second-ary teachers apply for a special three-year appointment to the CSEC's Colle-gial Consultation Team initiative. "Con-sulting teachers" receive training fromthe district to provide peer coaching andstaff development services to theirassigned schools (usually three or fourschools each) and assist with citywidestaff development activities. Currently,there are 30 elementary and 20 secondaryteachers serving in this capacity.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Mathematics, Science,and Technology Initiative (MSTI) wascreated in October of 1994 with thesupport of a $13.5-million Urban Sys-temic Initiative grant from the NationalScience Foundation (NSF). MSTI seeksto: (1) improve the scientific andmathematical literacy of all students; (2)

provide mathematics and science funda-mentals that will enable students toparticipate in a technological society;and (3) encourage minority students topursue careers in mathematics, science,engineering, and technology. As a firststep toward achieving these goals,MSTI sponsored a four-week summerinstitute in 1995 that was attended by 850elementary teachers. MSTI activities aremanaged by the CSEC and receivetechnical support from George Washing-ton University.

Goals 2000 funds are being used tosupport the district's school-basedreform initiatives, such as enterpriseschools, Renaissance 2000 schools,charter schools, and schools-within-schools. Schools that are interested inimplementing one of these autonomymodels are eligible to receive Goals 2000subgrants. These funds are used tosupport a variety of school improvementactivities, including professional devel-opment.


District Funds. The DCPS has acomplex fiscal allocation process. In thearea of professional development, thisprocess begins with the CSEC, whichsubmits a funding request and justifica-tion to the district's Budget Division.The request is reviewed, modified, andapproved by the superintendent and theBoard of Education. Additional reviewand approval is required from the mayor,the District Council, congressional bud-get committees, both houses of Con-gress, and the President of the UnitedStates. During the 1995-96 school year,the SEA allocated $285,000 for profes-sional development. However, nearly allof these funds were eliminated bybudget cuts.

Federal Funds. With district fundsfor professional development at aminimum, federal programs such asGoals 2000, Eisenhower, Title I, Title VI,and Title VII provide the primary fundingsources for professional development inthe District of Columbia. During the1995-96 year, the DCPS received a$401,600 Goals 2000 grant and a $1.5-mi I lion Eisenhower grant.

School Funds. The DCPS budgetoffice distributes a portion of the centralstaff development fund directly toschools. In addition, some schoolsparticipate in special projects, such aspublic charter schools, enterpriseschools, and Renaissance 2000 schools,which provide additional funding thatmay be used to support staff develop-ment


A Local School Restructuring Team(LSRT) is established at each school andserves in an advisory role to the school'sadministration. The LSRTs are respon-sible for preparing and overseeing theimplementation of an annual schoolimprovement plan, and professionaldevelopment is a required component ofthe plan. The district Office ofEducational Accountability approvesand monitors the plan. The officialschool-year calendar provides threecitywide days that may be used forprofessional development or schoolrecord-keeping activities.

Schools rely on a variety of staffdevelopment providers, including dis-trict staff, universities, and outsideconsultants. A significant portion ofstaff development is provided by con-sulting teachers.


Professional development is not acollective bargaining issue for theDistrict of Columbia's teachers. Salaryincrements may be earned for accumulat-ing degrees and course credits accord-ing to the following scale: master'sdegree, master's plus 30 credits, master'splus 60 credits, and the doctorate.

There is no districtwide policyregarding tuition or expenses reimburse-ment related to professional develop-ment. Local schools have the option ofproviding such support. On occasion,the SEA may create incentives for certaincategories of teachersfor example,mathematics and science teacherstoattend national conferences.


The CSEC works collaborativelywith a number of area colleges anduniversities to design and implementprofessional development services forteachers. These partnerships includethe following examples.

The Professional Development Pro-gram for Teachers of Middle-LevelUrban Learners is sponsored jointlyby the SEA and the National-LouisUniversity. Teachers earn 21

semester hours of graduate credit toreceive a middle school endorse-ment certification. Thus far, 42middle school teachers have com-pleted the program thus far.

Teachers interested in becomingeducational leaders are able toparticipate in the Cooperative Out-reach Principal Preparation Program,which is co-sponsored by the SEAand George Mason University. Thefirst cohort of 25 teachers startedclasses in September of 1995 andwill complete the program in thespring of 1997. A second cohort willbegin classes in the fall of 1996.

George Washington University andthe DCPS are partners in theProfessional Development Schools(PDS) project, which began duringthe 1994-95 school year. The PDSproject targets secondary schoolteachers and allows them to con-duct a five-week visit at a PDS site.While these "teacher fellows" areabsent from their home schools,graduate students from GeorgeMason University assume theirclassroom assignments as part of aninternship program. Thus far, 75teachers have completed this pro-gam.

4 7 BEST COPY AVAILABLE


Maurice R. SykesDeputy SuperintendentCenter for Systemic Educational Change415 12th Street, NW, Room 805Washington, DC 20004202-724-4100

Roger J. FishSenior AssociateOrganizational Culture/Human ResourceDevelopment & TrainingThe Center for Systemic EducationalChangeSecond and Peabody Streets, NWWashington, DC 20011202-576-6171

Barbara BullockPresidentWashington Teachers' Union1717 K Street NW, Suite 902Washington, DC 20005202-293-8600


Center for Systemic Educational Change(CSEC). A Design for Bringing Educa-tional Services to Students - BESST.District of Columbia Public Schools,Washington, DC. (August 1994).

CSEC. Curriculum Renewal Handbook.District of Columbia Public Schools,Washington, DC. (1994).

CSEC. Catalogue of Systemwide Train-ing Opportunities, SY 1995-96. Districtof Columbia Public Schools, Washing-ton, DC. (August 1995).

CSEC. Catalogue of Systemwide Train-ing Opportunities, Summer 1996. Dis-trict of Columbia Public Schools, Wash-ington, DC. (August 1995).






48

C RE


FloridaEducation Policy Context

Florida is one of the fastest growingstates in the nation, and its schooldistricts are experiencing a steady

influx of new students. During the 1996-97 school year, it is projected that morethan 68,000 new students will enterFlorida's schools, many of whom havelimited English language skills. Of the 67county school districts, 26 serve studentpopulations greater than 20,000; in fact,Dade and Broward Counties are two ofthe largest school districts in the nation.A number of economic factors affectpotential state funding sources forpublic education. Among these are thedisappointing returns on a state lotteryoriginally intended to enhance educa-tion, a large elderly population resistantto tax increases, an infrastructure strainedby massive growth, and a high-risk,changing, growing, and mobile studentpopulation.

The state has played a lead role inschool reform in Florida. Since 1970,there have been at least five comprehen-sive state reform initiatives. This wasmotivated in part by school fundingreforms in the 1970s that made the stateresponsible for a large share of the costsof public education.

There is now a ground swell ofsupport in Florida for the deregulation ofschools that is motivated by the bottomline of accountability. In 1991, the



Florida legislature passed a SchoolImprovement and Education Account-ability Act. This legislation, whichplaced both responsibility and account-ability for student success at the schoollevel, focused on seven broad areas ofreform: student readiness to startschool, increased graduation rates, im-proved student performance, improvedlearning environments, increased schoolsafety, better trained teachers and staff,and increased adult literacy. In 1996, aneighth area, increased parent involve-ment, was added.

The Sunshine State Standards wereadopted by the State Board of Education(SBE) in May of 1996. These standardsestablish a clear set of expectations ofwhat public school students in Floridashould know and be able to accomplishat specified grade levels. The Standardswere developed by the state Departmentof Education (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) at fourlevelsgrades PK-2, grades 3-5, grades6-8, and grades 9-12in the subjectareas of language arts, mathematics,science, social studies, the arts, healthand physical education, and foreignlanguages.

Based on the Sunshine State Stan-dards, the Florida Comprehensive As-sessment Test (FCAT) is being devel-oped to measure student learning in theareas of reading and mathematics.Statewide administration of the FCAT

will begin in the spring of 1998; it will betaken by all students at three timesduring their school careers: at theelementary, middle, and high schoollevels. The Florida Writes test, whichassesses writing proficiency, and theHigh School Competency Tests, whichare required for graduation, will continueto be administered. Schools thatproduce inadequate test results willreceive intensive, specialized assistanceto raise student achievement to accept-able levels.


The School Community Profes-sional Development Act, enacted by thelegislature in 1995, replaced the TeacherEducation Center Act and became thefoundation for Florida's new profes-sional development system. The newprofessional development model estab-lishes collaborative partnerships amongthe SEA, colleges and universities,school districts, individual schools, andconsortiums to promote joint responsi-bility and coordination across institu-tions.

Professional development is broadlydefined in Florida to encompass manymodels and various delivery systems,such as training, mentoring, coaching,distance learning, professional educa-tion, research, academies, and regional

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

49

centers. Professional development ac-tivities, as identified in site-based schoolimprovement plans, are supposed toaddress the needs of students andschools and to improve educator perfor-mance to increase student learning.During the 1996-97 school year, the SEAwill be conducting an evaluation ofprofessional development initiativesthroughout the state. It will submit afinal report to the legislature andgovernor in September of 1997.

The Education Standards Commis-sion (ESC) has been in existence since1980 and serves the SBE in an advisorycapacity on matters pertaining to teacherpreparation, certification, professionaldevelopment, and performance evalua-tion. Its membership is comprised of 12teachers, one school principal, onesuperintendent, one staff developmentdirector, four citizens, two deans ofcolleges/departments of education, onerepresentative of an independent institu-tion, and one representative of acommunity college.

The ESC has identified EducatorAccomplished Practices, which repre-sent the standards of knowledge, skills,and dispositions in 12 areas thatteachers need to obtain in order topractice effectively. These standardsrepresent a high level of teacherproficiency, based on a continuousquality improvement model that beginswith preservice teacher preparation andcontinues through the educator's pro-fessional career, with the ultimate inten-tion of promoting greater student achieve-ment. The Practices were distributed toall 67 Florida school district superinten-dents for their review. The SBE isexpected to implement the work of theESC in the near future. The ESC is in theprocess of identifying teacher subject-area competencies that are based on thestudent subject-area competencies de-fined in the Sunshine State Standards.

Teacher Certification Policies. Be-ginning teachers are issued a non-renewable, two-year Temporary Certifi-cate. Legislation passed in 1982 createdthe Florida Beginning Teacher Program,which was revamped in 1990 as theProfessional Orientation Program (POP)for Beginning Teachers. POP is arequired, one-year program for all begin-

ping teachers. Local districts areresponsible for designing and imple-menting POP activities in accordancewith state guidelines. The guidelinesspecify that each beginning teachershould be assigned a support team(comprised of the principal, a peerteacher, and one additional professionaleducator) that provides guidance andmonitoring. The support team isexpected to use a clinical supervisionmodel of pre-conferencing, observing,and post-conferencing, which culmi-nates in a summative observation. Mostdistricts use the state-developed andstate-validated Florida Performance Mea-surement System (FPMS), which can beused both as a formative and summativeevaluation instrument. The SEA hasprepared and maintained a FPMS Certi-fied Trainer Cadre of approximately 200school-, district-, and university-basededucators statewide. To date, 12,000individuals have been trained by thecadre as "Approved FPMS Observers."

After completing the POP, passingthe required certification tests, andcompleting any additional certificationrequirements, a teacher is eligible toreceive the Professional Certificate,which must be renewed every five yearsby obtaining either six college credits or120 in-service points. Certificate renewalis handled at the local level for district-employed educators.

Currently, Florida's entire certifica-tion and recertification process, as wellas the POP, is being re-examined. In thefall of 1995, the Commissioner appointedthree task forces to examine all compo-nents of educator professionalism and toconsider how to increase accountabilityand standards for teachers and adminis-trators in Florida. The three taskforcesEducator Preparation and Certi-fication, Educator Contracts and Perfor-mance, and Educator Standards ofConduct and Practicemet intermit-tently throughout the 1995-96 schoolyear and were comprised of teachers,school administrators, teacher associa-tion and union representatives, legisla-tors, and business and communityrepresentatives.

Task force recommendations ad-dress areas of reform such as profes-sional contracts, probationary employ-

50

ment, fingerprinting of all school districtemployees, self-reporting by educatorsof current felony charges, and therevamping of the teacher certificationsystem, including the recognition ofNational Board Certification. Therecommendations have been presentedto the Commissioner and will serve as aframework for developing legislativeinitiatives for the spring of 1997 session.

State-Supported Programs. Thestate supports two major professionaldevelopment models, the Area Centersfor Educational Enhancement and theFlorida Academies for Excellence inTeaching. These Centers and Acad-emies represent partnerships betweenschool districts and colleges and univer-sities that serve as principle deliverysystems for statewide professional de-velopment in the implementation ofstandards, new curriculum frameworks,and assessment strategies.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Goals 2000 funds wereawarded to local districts on a competi-tive basis to support innovative pro-grams, curriculum development, schoolrestructuring, and strategic professionaldevelopment initiatives. One particu-larly innovative project, the TeacherEducation Alliance, is a collaborationamong Broward County schools, thelocal community college, and a localuniversity to establish an urban profes-sional development center that providespreservice and in-service training toteachers.

Almost every national restructuringgroup is actively involved in an educa-tional reform effort in Florida andprovides additional resources for profes-sional development. For example, Dadeand Broward Counties are involved withthe New American Schools Develop-ment Corporation (NASDC), and IBMhas awarded a Reinventing Educationgrant to Broward County. An AnnenbergFoundation Challenge Grant is funding ajoint project with three southern Floridadistricts: Dade, Broward, and PalmBeach Counties. Dade County hasreceived an Urban Systemic Initiative(USI) grant from the National ScienceFoundation. Florida also receivedStatewide Systemic Initiative (SSI) fundsfrom the National Science Foundation in1991, but funding was withdrawn in 1996.

Florida receives more than $140million annually in federal funds underthe Individuals with Disabilities Educa-tion Act (IDEA), of which 22 percent isused to support services for studentswith disabilities. Several professionaldevelopment services are providedthrough IDEA funds, including theFlorida Diagnostic and Learning Re-source System (FDLRS), the MultiagencyService Network, and the SeverelyEmotionally Disturbed Students Pro-gram, as well as special projects such asthe Florida Inclusion Network, theInstitute for Integrated Services, and theInstitute for Small and Rural Districts.


State Funds. State professionaldevelopment funds are allocated toschool districts as a percentage of theirbase allocation per full-time equivalent(FTE) student, which is a fairly constantamount of approximately $6.00. Aportion of these funds must be used toconduct POP activities. The AreaCenters for Educational Enhancementand the Florida Academies for Excellencein Teaching are funded with more than $4million per year.

Federal Funds. In 1996-97, Floridareceived approximately $5,364,572through Goals 2000 for staff develop-ment; it also received $8,793,528 inEisenhower K-12 Mathematics and Sci-ence funds and $1,861,064 in EisenhowerHigher Education Mathematics andScience funds to support professionaldevelopment. It is estimated that $7million in IDEA funds were used toprovide professional development dur-ing the 1995-96 school year. Otherfederal sources used to support teachertraining include Safe and Drug FreeSchool funds ($200,000) and Compre-hensive School Health Education funds($309,644).

Local Funds. School districts mayallocate no less than $4 and no more than$9.50 per unweighted FTE of fundsgarnered through the Florida Lottery forprofessional development activities re-lated to their school improvement plans.


All school districts and manyprivate school organizations have ap-proved comprehensive master in-serviceplans for the professional developmentof all employees. In the past, the SEAapproved all in-service plans developedby the local district. The current systemprovides school districts greater flexibil-ity by giving local school boards re-sponsibility for the review and approvalof district master in-service plans. Themaster plan must be based on anassessment of training needs conductedby a committee that includes parents,teachers, and other educational per-sonnel. The plan must contain staffdevelopment activities that reflect theneeds identified in the school improve-ment plans. Each school's improvementplan is designed by a school advisorycouncil and must be approved by thedistrict school board.

The official school-year calendarconsists of 196 days, of which 16 may beused for non-teaching activities (e.g.,parent conference days, and record-keeping, etc.). Officials report that,typically, local bargaining agreementsspecify between four and six days peryear for professional development.


Bargaining for compensation forprofessional development is a permis-sive area in Florida. Reimbursementpolicies vary from district to district.Some districts reimburse teachers forcollege courses, award salary incrementsfor accumulated continuing educationunits, provide paid teacher sabbaticals,pay stipends for training days, or offerrelease time for professional develop-ment activities. Some districts have beencreative in using flex time and substituteteachers to enable individual teachers orteacher teams to receive training orengage in other professional develop-ment activities during the school day.


Teacher associations have histori-cally offered training in various state andlocal initiatives. The extent to whichthey are key providers of professionaldevelopment appears to vary widelyfrom district to district.

Heavy support from foundationsand other outside organizations is thenorm in many Florida districts. Becauseof rapid growth in both student popula-tion and the number of businesses in thestate, Florida has become an educationallaboratory of sorts. Businesses andother organizations provide many train-ing opportunities to teachers and othereducators.


Bob BedfordDeputy CommissionerFlorida Department of EducationCapitol Building, Room PL-08Tallahassee, FL 32399904-413-0555

Betty CoxeDirectorHuman Resource DevelopmentFlorida Department of Education325 West Gaines Street, Suite 203904-487-3663

Suzanne KinzerTeacher Education AllianceFlorida Atlantic University600 SE Third AvenueFt. Lauderdale, FL 33301305-760-7344


BEST COPY AVAILABLE





52 cpRE


GeorgiaEducation Policy Context

eorgia serves over 1.2 milliontudents in its 181 public school

districts. Georgia's State De-partment of Education (referred tohereafter as the state education agency,or SEA) has recently been restructuredto promote increased decision making inlocal schools. The state's educationpriorities include scaling back bureau-cracy and regulations to increase schoolautonomy in setting educational goalsand determining operational structure.Georgia promotes a "back to basics"educational philosophy that emphasizesearly childhood education, student in-centives for higher education, flexibilityin textbook adoption, and the use oftechnology. Graduation credentialshave been narrowed to two optionsacollege-prep or vocational diplomatoreflect the state's focus on high schoolarticulation to careers and postsecondaryeducation. The general diploma hasbeen eliminated.

In 1985, Georgia's legislature passeda comprehensive education reform pack-age, the Quality Basic Education (QBE)Act. QBE mandates staff developmentfor all school personnel, includingschool board members and non-certifiedstaff. Under the QBE Act, the statefunding formula supports the implemen-tation of districts' comprehensive staffdevelopment plans, which are submittedto the State Board of Education (SBE) for



review and approval. Prior to thepassing of the QBE Act, only thosedistricts that requested state monieswere required to design and submit anannual staff development plan. Alldistricts must now submit an annual staffdevelopment plan that reflects the needsof local personnel in the following areas:the induction of beginning teachers;needs identified during personnel evalu-ations; needs identified during evalua-tion of instructional programs; and otherneeds identified by the districts orprescribed by the SBE. Georgia's Com-prehensive Staff Development Programis a mandated, state-funded system thataddresses professional developmentneeds identified at the district andschool levels.

Recent reform effortssuch as theSchools for the Future Program initiatedby the Georgia Board of Education in1991, the Charter Schools Programinitiated by Georgia's legislature in 1993,and the Next Generation Schools Projectinitiated by the Georgia Partnership forExcellence in Education in 1993represent broad commitments of state-level resources to support school-basedrestructuring. (The Georgia Partnershipfor Excellence in Education is a state-level collaborative of business, govern-ment, and education leaders. Formed in1990, the Partnership promotes qualitypublic education in Georgia.) To assistlocal systems with restructuring, theSEA and Regional Education Service

Agencies (RESAs) initiated a majoreffort in 1995 to provide on-demand,customized technical assistance. Assis-tance is available regarding schoolrestructuring and improvement, needsassessment, and instructional technol-ogy, as well as in other areas.


Georgia has long played a support-ive role in teacher development and has,for many years, provided grants todistricts to reimburse teachers forcollege tuition. In 1973, the SBEapproved a "State Plan for Staff Devel-opment," which encouraged districts toplan and implement their own staffdevelopment programs. The state planlinked teacher recertification to theaccumulation of staff development units(SDUs) or college credit hours that couldbe earned through participation inprofessional development activities of-fered by districts and other agencies. Inaddition, Georgia is a partner state withthe National Commission on Teachingand America's Future and will undergo ateacher development policy audit, theresults of which will be used to institute acomprehensive plan for teacher profes-sional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. In1991, Georgia's legislature passed a bill(HB 589) that transferred authority forteacher preparation and licensure from

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

the SBE to an autonomous state agencyknown as the Professional StandardCommission (PSC). The Commission iscomprised of 28 members representingP -12 education, institutions of highereducation, health and human services,the corporate sector, and the commu-nity; by statute, nine PSC members areclassroom teachers. In 1994, the PSCamended state requirements for teacherand administrator certification programs.

Georgia teachers are issued a ClearRenewal Certificate upon successfulcompletion of preservice requirements.This certification is renewable every fiveyears by earning ten quarter hours ofcollege credit or Georgia staff develop-ment credits and by posting a satisfac-tory score on a PSC-authorized subject-matter test. Teachers may earn SDUsthrough participation in district-spon-sored staff development activities. OneSDU is awarded for every 10 contacthours of instruction. Since 1990, manybeginning teachers (i.e., teachers withless than three years of experience) havehad the opportunity to participate inlocally designed induction programs.State-trained mentors provide guidanceto beginning teachers.

Georgia encourages its teachers toapply for National Board Certificationand to participate in examination prepa-ration programs by paying their examina-tion fees and providing a salary increasefor those who successfully achieveBoard certification.

Districts are required to conduct anannual teacher performance evaluationprocess; however, the results of teacherevaluations do not affect recertification.Districts have the option of evaluatingteachers using the state-designed Geor-gia Teacher Evaluation Program (GTEP)or a different evaluation instrument.Regardless of the chosen method,personnel needs identified through theevaluation process must be incorporatedinto districts' staff development plans.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA oversees the Georgia EducationLeadership Academy, which was createdby the QBE Act of 1985. The Academyconducts seminars, symposia, specialworkshops, and summer institutesthroughout the state on topics such aspersonnel assessment and evaluation,

leadership development, technologyplanning and utilization, managementskills, information dissemination, andschool improvement activities. TheAcademy's Staff Development Unitserves as the central source of informa-tion and expertise for district- andschool-level educators, who may use itsresources to learn about research issues,trends, and effective practice in profes-sional development. These structuresenable the SEA to provide resourcematerials, technical assistance, and train-ing services to assist local districts incarrying out their staff developmentplans.

The SEA also sponsors TechnologyTraining Centers, which are operated incollaboration with colleges, universities,and the RESAs. Each Center conducts aTechnology Leadership Institute, whichprovides 37 full-day courses designed tomeet the needs of technology specialistsat the district level. Many other schoolpersonnel have received training intechnology at these Centers. Custom-ized on-site training and distance learn-ing are also available.

Through its Teacher Support Spe-cialist and Induction Mentor Teacherprograms, the SEA trains experiencedclassroom teachers to become mentorsand/or supervisors for student internsand beginning teachers. Applicants forthese programs must have a minimum ofthree years of teaching experience,supply two recommendations (one froma principal), and show evidence ofprofessional competency. Teachersearn ten SDUs upon program comple-tion. Other professional developmentprograms offered through the SEAinclude the Superintendent ProfessionalDevelopment Program, the Next Genera-tion School Project Leadership TeamDevelopment Program, the Governor'sSchool Leadership Institute, the NewLeaders Institute, the New Superinten-dent Orientation Program, andEducation's Leadership Georgia.

Georgia law has established 16

RESAs to provide support services(including staff development) that re-spond to the needs of school districts.Each RESA is governed by a boardrepresenting local school board mem-bers within its service area. RESAs are

54

required to provide services in researchand planning, staff development, cur-riculum and instruction, assessment andevaluation, electronic technology, andalcohol and drug abuse instruction.Other services provided by RESAs aredetermined through local needs assess-ments. Currently, RESAs serve approxi-mately 175 of the 180 school districts inthe state. RESAs receive funding fromthe state, as well as through feescollected from participating schoolsdistricts, competitive grants, and federalprograms.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Georgia Initiative inMathematics and Science (GIMS) wascreated in 1993 through a StatewideSystemic Initiative (SSI) grant from theNational Science Foundation. GIMSactivities, managed by the University ofGeorgia's Science Education Depart-ment, focus primarily on improvingmiddle-grade (4-8) mathematics andscience education, but include all grades,K-12. The program is coordinatedthrough nine regional GIMS Centers,which utilize a professional developmentschool (PDS) model to partner highereducation institutions with middleschools across the state. The Centerspromote collegial discourse among uni-versity faculty and classroom teachersto research, design, and implementreforms related to curriculum and in-struction, student assessment, systemschange, and diversity. Focus Teamsrepresenting each Center meet quarterlyfor cross-site information sharing,progress reporting, and discussing scal-ing up and other implementation issues.

Georgia has received a Goals 2000grant, a portion of which has beenallocated to support professional devel-opment. During the 1995-96 school year,26 local school systems received fundsfor professional development as part oftheir Goals 2000 programs.


State Funds. Since 1987, the statehas provided a cost-of-instruction (COI)allocation to districts each year tosupport staff development programs.COI allocations are calculated as the

equivalent of .5 percent of all profes-sional salaries in the district. Thesefunds can be used to pay for release time(i.e., substitute teacher salaries), travel toconferences and workshops, trainer andconsultant fees, materials, equipmentused for staff development activities,and reimbursement to teachers forregistration fees, course tuition, ortextbooks. The total amount of COIallocations for FY 1994 was $6,375,450;the FY 1995 budget increased to$6,977,959.

Since 1988, Georgia's legislature hasappropriated annual funds for Profes-sional Development Stipends (PDS). InFY 1994, the allocation was $21,980,497;in FY 1995, it increased to $22,652,623.Districts may award stipends to indi-viduals who successfully complete anapproved staff development activity thatfocuses on the skills development areasidentified through a needs assessmentprocess. Stipends may only be awardedfor staff development activities thatrelate directly to school and/or districteducational programs.

The basic state grant for the RESAswas $9.7 million for the 1996-97 schoolyear. The SEA also allocates funds toprovide stipends to teachers who mentorbeginning teachers. This allocationtotaled $1.25 million in 1994-95 and willremain constant through FY 1997.

Federal Funds. During the 1995-96school year, Georgia received a $6.2-million Eisenhower Professional Devel-opment grant and an $8.9-million Goals2000 grant (a portion of which wasallocated for professional developmentsubgrants to districts). GIMS activitiesare funded primarily by a five-year, $10-million grant from the National ScienceFoundation.

Local Funds. Districts are allowedunlimited transfer of monies betweenCOI and PDS allocations. No more than10 percent of these funds may be usedfor administration costs related to thedelivery of staff development activities.


Under the QBE Act, districts arerequired to develop and submit staff

development plans. These plans arelargely based on the needs identified inthe annual personnel evaluation pro-cess, but they may also reflect emerginginterests in new education practices.Staff development plans are submittedannually and must be approved by theSEA before funds are released. Districtsare also required to submit an end-of-year report that describes the staffdevelopment activities conducted, thenumber and types of participants, and anevaluative summary of the impact andoutcomes of their staff developmentprograms. Every five years, the SEAconducts on-site compliance monitoringof district staff development plans.

Districts must designate a staffdevelopment coordinator, who is re-sponsible for creating an inclusiveprocess of planning, implementation,and evaluation of staff development. Insmaller districts, this role may be one ofseveral responsibilities assigned to acentral administrator, while, in largerdistricts, a person may be hired solely forthis purpose. Districts may use one ormore of ten "local use workdays" that arebuilt into the school-year calendar fornon-classroom-based activities. Thereis no minimum number of days requiredby law specifically for staff development.


There is no collective bargaining inGeorgia. Teachers' salaries are based ona state salary scale, which awards stepincreases based on years of experienceand advanced degrees earned. Indi-vidual districts may augment theseincreases, and some suburban and largeurban districts do. Georgia teachers whoachieve National Board Certificationreceive a one-time, 5 percent salarybonus. The state also reimbursesNational Board certified teachers for thecost of undergoing National Board forProfessional Teaching Standards(NBPTS) assessments.

COI funds may be used to reimburseteachers for expenses incurred as a resultof their participation in staff develop-ment activities, such as conferenceregistration fees, course tuition, andtextbooks. PDS funds are made available

Jc- rJ

to teachers who successfully completeaccredited college or SDU courses.Stipends are awarded at a rate not toexceed $150 per quarter hour of collegecredit or equivalent SDU credit. Teach-ers who receive PDS monies are noteligible to apply for tuition reimburse-ment. COI and PDS funds may not beused when coursework is undertaken forthe primary purpose of obtaining anadvanced degree.


The College of Education at theUniversity of Georgia established aLeague of Professional Schools in 1989as part of its Program for SchoolImprovement (PSI) initiative. TheLeague of Professional Schools involves105 schools in Georgia, engaging them ina change process that "promotes theschool as a democratic learning commu-nity that is student-oriented and focusedon improving teaching and learning forall." In order to join the League, 80percent of a school's staff must agree toengage in the process, after which theUniversity provides assistance in estab-lishing a shared decision-making struc-ture, planning instructional initiatives,conducting a school needs assessment,and formulating structures for continueddialogue and collegial planning. TheLeague also provides a newsletter,cross-site meetings, an Action ResearchConsortium, and an information retrievalsystem that includes the latest researchon school improvement issues.

The Georgia Staff DevelopmentCouncil (GSDC) was created in 1986 topromote professional development forGeorgia's educators by providing lead-ership, disseminating research on effec-tive practices, and serving as a statenetwork for educators to share informa-tion on staff development issues. TheCouncil conducts conferences in the falland spring, provides technical assis-tance services, sponsors a recognitionprogram for staff developers, dissemi-nates resource materials, and producesUpdate, a quarterly newsletter.

The Georgia Vocational Staff Devel-opment Consortium (GVSDC) is anassociation of member school districtsorganized for the purpose of providingapproved staff development opportuni-ties for the state's vocational educators.All districts are eligible to join theGVSDC by paying a membership feebased on a percentage of their CarlPerkins Vocational Basic Grant Alloca-tions. Courses offered include adminis-tration, agriculture, applied mathematics,communication, biology /chemistry, busi-ness and marketing, family and con-sumer sciences, special needs, technol-ogy, and trade and industrial sciences.Teachers and other educators frommember districts may participate inGVSDC courses at no cost. Non-memberdistrict teachers may also participate fora minimal fee. All courses offered by theConsortium are eligible for SDU credit.


Margaret M. TorreyExecutive SecretaryGeorgia Professional StandardsCommission1454 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334404-657-9006

J. Fulton StoneDirector of Staff DevelopmentGeorgia Department of Education1866 Twin Towers EastAtlanta, GA 30334404-656-2433

Carl GlickmanLeague of Professional SchoolsDepartment of Teacher EducationUniversity of Georgia124 Aderhold HallAthens, GA 30602706-542-2516


Georgia Staff Development Program.Georgia Department of Education (FY1994).

Resource Guide for Staff Development.Georgia Department of Education (1993).

School Focused Staff DevelopmentGuide. Georgia Department of Educa-tion (June 1990).

Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures arefor 1993.






HawaiiEducation Policy Context

Hawaii is a small state servingapproximately 180,430 studentsin its public education system of

240 schools within one state "district."The schools are organized into sevengeographic administrative units, whichare referred to as districts in Hawaii(throughout this document, the term"district" refers to an intermediateadministrative unit). Hawaii has astatewide school system with one Boardof Education. Funding for local schoolsis allocated by the state legislature, andall school personnel are state employees.

Under its education reform agenda,the state delegated much of its authorityto the schools. The 1989 SchoolCommunity-Based Management lawmoved decision-making authority re-garding curriculum, instruction, andadministrative and assessment policiesto the schools. Subsequently, a lump-sum budgeting law decentralized budgetauthority to the schools. Schools arefunded based on a weighted per-pupilallocation; they have limited flexibilityand control over how funds are spent forinstruction and other programs.

Hawaii recently faced a budgetdeficit that, in conjunction with the newlump-sum budgeting law, resulted inlarge cuts to the Hawaii Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA). Thestatewide system of resource teams,



previously available in each schooldistrict to provide on-site professionaldevelopment, was eliminated. Thebudget cuts reduced the SEA's ability todeliver in-service activities and technicalassistance to local schools.

The Board of Education approved adownsizing and restructuring plan forthe SEA effective in FY 1996-97. Theplan provides essential services toschools through the "RAPID" (Respon-sive, Accessible, Performance-driven,Integrated, and Direct) initiative. RAPIDservices are carried out through central-ized budget, business, personnel, tech-nological, and decentralized instruc-tional support services. The SEA isworking with the district superinten-dents and deputies to establish newroles and responsibilities for districtleaders, including further decentraliza-tion of their supervisory relationshipswith school principals. Most profes-sional development policies are set at theschool level.

State initiatives to develop perfor-mance standards for students and torestructure student assessment havesignificant implications for the class-room. For example, new curriculumguidelines have yet to be distributed, yetschool staff are preparing new curriculato help students perform well on the newstate assessments.


While the state is devolving manymanagement responsibilities to the locallevel, some state-level initiatives arehaving an impact on teacher profes-sional development.

The Hawaii Teachers StandardsBoard (HTSB) was established by thelegislature in July of 1995 to help theteaching profession attain a statuscomparable to that of other professions,to ensure that all children have "quali-fied" teachers, and to regain publicconfidence in teachers. The HTSB hasstatutory authority to set licensing andcredentialing standards for teachers, toreview and revise those standards, to setfees for recertification, and to determinepenalties. The HTSB operates autono-mously, although the SEA is stillresponsible for processing the paperwork associated with teacher certifica-tion.

Teacher Certification Policies.Hawaii's budget difficulties have had asignificant impact on the certificationand recertification of teachers. Previ-ously, state funds provided support fornew teachers through mentoring andtraining; however, funding has beenpassed directly to the schools, whichnow have the option of providingsupport services to new teachers. Thereare no recertification requirements at this

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

1

time, although a new assessment pro-cess for teachers and administrators isbeing studied and the HTSB is expectedto establish a recertification policy foreducators.

State-Supported Programs. TwoSEA offices play roles in teacherprofessional development. The Office ofPersonnel Services provides a compre-hensive personnel program for certifiedand classified employees of the publicschool system, and oversees the renewalof teaching licenses. The Office ofInstructional Services develops andprovides staff development for newprograms and services, and providestechnical assistance, coordination, andsupport for statewide curricular andinstructional programs and activities.

The SEA literacy project, the Suc-cess Compact, offers state-sponsoredprofessional development activities toschools. "Master teachers" are trainedin implementing the Success Compact intheir own schools, then used to helpestablish the program in others. Localschools pay for master-teacher services,and the SEA operating budget pays forsome training costs. Schools that adoptthe Success Compact receive in-servicedays for staff development activities.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The state has used Goals2000 to help support its comprehensiveeducational reform effort and to supportlocal school reform.


State Funds. Prior to the budgetcrisis, there had been a state line item forprofessional development of $2.5 million.There is no longer a separate line item inthe state's education budget for profes-sional development. However, becausethe state fully funds education, the statefunds any professional developmentbudgeted by schools. There are no stateregulations regarding local spending onprofessional development. Decisionsabout spending on professional devel-opment are now made at the local level.

The SEA proposed $3.4-million innew initiatives for FY 1996-97, including$808,000 for developing a comprehen-sive assessment and accountability

2

system to evaluate student and staffperformance, and $1.2 million for tenresource teachers to provide staffdevelopment, substitute teacher fundsto release master teachers, and generalsupport for 30 new Success Compactschools.

Federal Funds. The state receivesGoals 2000, Eisenhower, and Title 1

funds that support professional devel-opment activities. Goals 2000 fundingfor Year 2 totaled $1,381,641, ninetypercent of which went to local districtsfor projects to improve student achieve-ment. The remaining ten percent wasused by the state for its education reformplan. Hawaii received $1,243,473 inEisenhower funds in FY 1995.

Local Funds. The state does notrequire districts or schools to allocate aspecific portion of their budgets for staffdevelopment. Professional developmentspending varies from school to school,and district to district.


The state requires districts andschools to design improvement planswhich include provisions for staffdevelopment. Schools develop theirown plans based on the direction set bythe state and district superintendents.District improvement plans are based onthe needs and goals outlined in theindividual school improvement plans,with a focus on supporting schools inmeeting the district goals. Districtsuperintendents monitor school im-provement plans by meeting with princi-pals to discuss what has been accom-plished in their individual schools. Thedistrict superintendent is appointed andevaluated (based on district perfor-mance) by the state superintendent.

Participation in school community-based management (SCBM) is currentlyvoluntary and open to all public schoolsin Hawaii, but all public schools willeventually participate. As a part ofSCBM, schools submit directly to thestate proposals that include schoolimprovement plans and requests for staffdevelopment support.

The SEA restructuring deployed 35state and district curriculum specialistsas school renewal specialists (SRSs).The SRSs assist in the school renewalprocess by providing leadership, plan-ning, and coordination of supportservices to schools. They help schoolsimplement Performance Standards andthe Success Compact. The SRSs areemployed by the district but workclosely with school principals.


All teachers in Hawaii are governedby one state contract. The Hawaii StateTeachers Association (HSTA) has beenactive in seeking professional develop-ment opportunities for its members. Onepriority has been providing teacherswith time needed to plan and pursueprofessional development activities.Another issue is the accessibility and/ordelivery of professional development toHSTA members on neighboring islandswhich are difficult to access.

Teachers are sometimes reimbursedfor professional development costs, butschool policies vary. They receivesalary increments for accumulating col-lege coursework: 30 credits after abachelor's degree warrants a stepincrease. Teachers are currently evalu-ated on a two-year cycle. However, theSEA is reviewing the teacher evaluationprocess and investigating performance-based teacher evaluation.


The HSTA provides numerousworkshops and other professional de-velopment services to its members. Itholds institutes on topics such asinclusion, discipline, scheduling, hu-man-relations, team-building, and deci-sion-making. HSTA provides staff,upon request, to work with theirmembers in districts or schools. Teacherorganizations, such as content-relatedteacher organizations, other than HSTAalso provide professional development.

Higher education is the largestsource of professional development forteachers in Hawaii. The SEA works withstate institutions of higher education tocoordinate and plan professional devel-opment. The University of Hawaii worksdirectly with some school districts.

The private sector also providesprofessional development. For example,Chevron offers development opportuni-ties for science teachers working inschool districts where the company hasrefineries.


Leighton HiraiPersonnel SpecialistOffice of Personnel ServicesDepartment of EducationP.O. Box 2360Honolulu, HI 96804808-586-3280

Arlene Lee WilliamsInstruction and Professional Develop-ment SpecialistHawaii Teachers Standards BoardHawaii State Teachers Association2828 Paa Street, Room 2050Honolulu, HI 96817808-833-2711

Clara BurrowsOffice of Personnel ServicesDepartment of EducationP.O. Box 2360Honolulu, HI 96804808-586-3280






593


IdahoEducation Policy Context

Idaho is a very remote and rural statewith a small student population. In1993, 236,774 students were enrolled

in Idaho's public schools. However, thisrepresents a substantial increase inenrollment over the past decade. Thereare many small school districts in thestate, some of which have fewer than 300students. Idaho's school districts havea great deal of local control over thesetting of education policy, and manydecisions affecting teacher professionaldevelopment take place in school anddistrict offices.

After the election of a new statesuperintendent in January of 1995, state-level education policy in Idaho began tochange significantly. A new testingprogram for students has been imple-mented under the direction of Superin-tendent Anne Fox, who also intends todraft new curriculum frameworks with amore "back to basics" approach. Idahohas not adopted content standards.However, the first drafts of its newcurriculum guides were released in 1996.In July of 1995, the Idaho Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) revisedthe standards for the certification ofschool personnel.




The Professional Standards Com-mission (PSC) serves in an advisory roleto the State Board of Education. ThePSC is responsible for setting standardsfor teacher licensure, and is currentlyreworking teacher preservice standards.

However, most professional devel-opment planning takes place at thedistrict level. Each district is required tocreate a professional development plan.The state distributes a professionaldevelopment handbook to districts toguide the design and implementation ofprofessional development plans. Thehandbook was created by the StateInservice Advisory Committee and thePSC in 1984. It lists the recertificationrequirements (which were established in1984) and outlines expected roles andresponsibilities of the state and ofdistricts in providing professional devel-opment for teachers. While the statehandbook indicates that the SEA willcollect and review district plans throughan approval and accreditation process,there are reportedly no penalties fordistricts if they fail to comply with thisrequirement.

Teacher Certification Policies.Regular Idaho teaching credentials areissued for a five-year period for bothinitial and continuing teachers. There isa professional development require-ment; teachers must earn six semesterhours or their equivalent within this five-year period. Of these six semester hours,at least three must represent universityor college credit. No more than threehours of approved in-service can beapplied toward recertification. Teachersare encouraged by the SEA to developindividual professional growth plans.An advanced teaching certificate isavailable and requires a master's degreein either a specific content area or incurriculum and instruction and threeyears of teaching experience.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA does provide some professionaldevelopment opportunities for Idahoteachers. Every first Thursday andFriday in October is reserved for state in-service activities. However, it is notmandatory for districts to set aside thesedays. Professional development policyfalls under the domain of the state Officeof Teacher Certification.

The only new state initiativesregarding professional development foreducators are related to technology. Thestate legislature has been allocating

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

60 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

funds for schools to upgrade theirtechnological capacitydedicating ap-proximately $10.4 million from 1994 to1996 alone to support this effort. Aportion of those funds have been usedto support professional development forteachers.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. In 1995, Idaho received bothGoals 2000 and Eisenhower funding.The $1.2-million Eisenhower grant helpedto support professional developmentprograms in the state.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state's budget for professionaldevelopment. The SEA does providesome technical assistance and some in-service activities for teachers, althoughit is unknown what amount is spent onthese activities. At one time, the statefunded a mentor program for newteachers, but it was subsequently cutfrom the budget.

Federal Funds. Idaho received$1,243,473 in Eisenhower funding in FY1995 to help support professionaldevelopment activities. Idaho received$450,000 in Goals 2000 funding in Year 1.

Local Funds. Districts and teachersdirectly pay for the major portion of theirprofessional development costs. Inorder to provide salary increments forteachers who pursue professional devel-opment, state aid is funneled to schooldistricts based on the number of coursecredits that its teachers earn.


As mentioned above, every schooldistrict is required to forward adistrictwide professional developmentplan to the SEA. These plans are to bebased on a template provided by theagency. Districts are also expected toestablish professional development com-mittees (comprised of teachers, non-

2

certificated staff, community members,and administrators), to conduct a needsassessment each year, and to developpriority areas for their professionaldevelopment plans. There is no statemoney available for developing orimplementing the plans and also nopenalty for the failure to comply with thisrequirement. There is no state require-ment that districts set aside funds forprofessional development, nor is there amandated minimum number of profes-sional development days.


Collective bargaining in Idaho onlyimpacts professional development at thelocal level. Teachers usually pay formost of their professional developmentexpenses. They can earn salaryincrements for up to 15 semester hours ofcoursework.

By law, teachers must be evaluatedtwice each year for the first three years ofemployment. After three years, theymust be evaluated once each year. Thisevaluation is not linked to recertification.


The Idaho Education Association(lEA) has been active at both the stateand local levels in addressing the issueof professional growth opportunities forits members. They have worked with thePSC to help develop priorities in thisarea, and, on the local level, theysponsor local professional developmentcommittees that work with districts.These local committees represent teach-ers, collect information about profes-sional development needs, and helpteachers identify their own resourcesand opportunities. At the state level, theIEA developed and published a docu-ment, called "Visions of Change," thatoutlines the WA's vision for the future ofeducation in Idaho. In terms ofprofessional development, the docu-ment calls for a mentoring system fornew teachers, more time for teachers to

collaborate and pursue professionaldevelopment, higher salaries for educa-tors, more high-quality in-service activi-ties, and in-school time scheduled forcollaboration and planning with otherteachers. In addition, the state'ssubject-matter teacher organizations of-fer some professional development op-portunities for their members.

Given the college coursework re-quirement for recertification, highereducation institutions are one of thelargest providers of professional devel-opment for Idaho's teachers. Highereducation institutions also work withlocal districts to provide on-site profes-sional development for teachers.

Foundations and businessessuchas US West, an Idaho phone serviceprovider that awards grants to "innova-tive" teachersalso provide support forprofessional development for Idaho'seducators.


Roger HanshewSupervisor of Teacher CertificationTeacher Certification and ProfessionalStandardsIdaho Department of EducationP.O. Box 83720Boise, ID 83720-0027208-332-6800

Bob KnoespelIdaho Professional Standards BoardMount View Middle School645 Mitchell LaneBlackfoot, ID 83221208-785-8820

Jim ShackelfordExecutive DirectorIdaho Education AssociationP.O. Box 2638Boise, ID 83701208-336-6967


for 1993.





623


IllinoisEducation Policy Context

llinois enrolls 943,623 students in itspublic school system, which isrganized into 906 districts. As in

many states, there is some tension inIllinois between the tradition of localcontrol over education policy and thedesire to establish a vision and set policyat the state level. The Illinois State Boardof Education serves as the state'seducation agency (SEA). The Governorappoints the members of the Board, andthey appoint the Superintendent.

Superintendent Joseph Spagnoloissued a Quality Schools Initiative (QSI)concept paper that was adopted by theSEA in August of 1995. Intended toinitiate a dialogue about educationimprovement and reform in Illinois, theQSI calls for the development ofstandards for students and for theteacher professional development nec-essary to support those standards. Anew student assessment system is beingdeveloped and is expected to be in placeby 1999.

The Superintendent recently reorga-nized the SEA into a system of sixCenters for Educational Leadership,reporting to a central Leadership Team inthe SEA. The Center for Accountabilityand Quality Assurance oversees thestate's professional development poli-cies. The Center has five divisions:Professional Preparation; Change andInnovation; Learning, Standards, and



Assessment; Quality Review and SchoolImprovement Planning; and Policies andPractices. The Project Team for Profes-sional Development in the SEA alsofocuses on professional developmentfor educators.


As a part of its general missionstatement, the SEA has outlined a seriesof goals for improving education for allIllinois students. Ensuring a qualifiedworkforce of educators is the sixth goal:

All Illinois public school studentswill have access to schools andclassrooms with highly qualifiedand effective professionals whoensure that students achieve highlevels of learning.

The SEA Project Team for Profes-sional Development and relevant sub-committees have been working toestablish a vision for ongoing teacherprofessional development. The ProjectTeam is creating a professional develop-ment action plan for the state. An "ideapaper" on professional development,which served as the impetus for thecreation of this Project Team, outlines aplan for bringing together relevantstakeholders to develop a professionaldevelopment strategy in Illinois. Aresearch effort is underway to design the

most appropriate plan for implementa-tion. The Professional DevelopmentProject Team organized a three-day"search conference" and conductedfocus groups to help develop a proposal.

In 1996, the SEA created a task forcewhich received a grant from the JoyceFoundation to study and make recom-mendations regarding a new system ofinitial certification. In August of 1996,the task force presented its recommenda-tions for revising teacher certificationand recertification. Recommended was arequirement that teachers participate inprofessional development to renew theircertificates.

The recommendations from theProject Team and the task force werestudied and combined into one docu-ment, "Illinois Framework for Restructur-ing the Recruitment, Preparation, Licen-sure and Continuing Professional Devel-opment of Teachers." Adopted by theSBE in November of 1996, the "Frame-work" recommended:

Professional Standards. Illinoisshould adopt professional standardsthat clearly indicate what teachers areexpected to know and be able to do.Standards should include those of theInterstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium (INTASC).

Teacher Preparation Programs.The design of teacher preparationprograms should be based on identifiedteacher standards. Course-based re-quirements should be eliminated. Teacher

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


63

preparation programs should includecomprehensive clinical experiences.

New Teacher Induction. Beginningteachers should be provided the supportand guidance needed to effectively dealwith the challenges of their newresponsibilities. Standards for newteacher induction programs should bedeveloped and every school in Illinoisshould implement a program for newteachers.

State Licensure/Certification Sys-tem. A three-tiered system of licensureshould be developed which includes aninitial license, a standard license, and anadvanced certificate. The levels of theteacher licenses should reflect whatteachers need to know and be able to doat various grade levels and in specificsubject or teaching areas.

Continuing Professional Develop-ment. Professional development shouldbe required for renewal of licenses.Funding and other support should beprovided to local schools to promote thedevelopment of learning communities.The state should foster new resourcesfor professional development, such asteacher academies and school-univer-sity partnerships.

School Cultures. Local schoolsshould be encouraged to develop ashared vision of what they hope theirschools will become and work towardthat vision. Schools should structuretheir instructional day in ways whichpromote collaboration and mutual sup-port.

Recruitment. The state, in partner-ship with Illinois business and educationcommunities, should develop an aggres-sive, well-coordinated and creative planfor recruiting talented individuals intothe profession.

Many of "Framework" recommenda-tions will require legislative action whichwill be sought in an upcoming legislativesession. The SEA will convene advisorygroups to detail each recommendation.The advisory groups are expected tomake additional recommendations inSeptember 1997.

Illinois is a partner state with theNational Commission on Teaching andAmerica's Future, allowing Illinois toimplement pilot projects which corre-spond to the recommendations in the

2

"Framework" and the NationalCommission's report, "What MattersMost: Teaching and America's Future."

These pilot projects include aprogram to allow new teachers in theChicago Public School System to pilottest a performance-based portfolio as-sessment in cooperation with INTASC.New teachers will develop portfoliosusing INTASC guidelines and will bementored by experienced teachers whohold advanced certificates through theNational Board for Professional TeacherStandards.

Another pilot project allows severalteacher education institutions to rede-sign at least one of their approvedteacher education programs to align withINTASC standards.

Teacher Certification Policies. Af-ter passing the initial certification re-quirements of written tests in contentareas and basic skills, teachers receive astandard certificate that is subject torenewal every four years. Illinois grantsonly provisional certificates to teachersrelocating from out-of-state. Newteachers are not required to undergo anyspecial professional development activi-ties. They are evaluated once each yearfor two years; this can be extended if theteacher requires ongoing support.

After two years of employment,state law requires teachers to beevaluated every two years. Districtsmust develop a remediation plan for anyeducator found to be performing unsat-isfactorily. However, this requirement isnot linked to recertification.

As of April 1997, there were noprofessional development requirementsfor recertification in Illinois. The onlystate requirement was a yearly registra-tion fee paid to the regional office ofeducation which is used to providedistrict-level professional developmentactivities. Administrators, however, arerequired to participate in professionaldevelopment activities to renew theircertificates.

A 19-member State Teacher Certifi-cation Board (STCB) advises the SEA oncertification and preservice programapproval. A regional delivery system ofprofessional development and educa-tional services, the regional offices ofeducation (ROEs) plays a significant role

E4

in brokering resources for teacherprofessional development. The role ofROEs recently shifted from regulator toprovider of technical assistance andsupport for local schools. There are 45ROEs in Illinois, each with its ownsuperintendent and four intermediateservice centers. The state sponsorsprofessional development academies forROE staff, in cooperation with theNational Staff Development Council.These academies have been replicated inother states.

State-Supported Programs. For themost part, professional developmentservices for teachers are determinedlocally, with very little intervention fromthe state. The state does require thatgrades 7 to 12 teachers be trained toidentify suicidal behavior in adolescentsand to intervene appropriately. Thisrequirement is not linked to licensure.

In 1992, Senate Bill 1988 wasenacted, which allowed schools to banktime over and above the normal five-hourinstructional day to use for in-houseprofessional development. Thus, schoolsscheduling longer instructional daysgain time for professional development.Once schools have accrued a certainamount of banked hours, they canrelease students early and use the timefor staff development activities. Ap-proximately 25 percent of the schools inIllinois take advantage of this law,including approximately 25 percent ofthe schools in Chicago.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Illinois uses Goals 2000funding for subgrants to districts forprofessional development and preservicetraining to support school improvementplans, program coordination, and build-ing community involvement. Thesubgrants support innovative programsthat increase educators' knowledge andskills, and student achievement relativeto the state goals for learning.

The National Board for ProfessionalTeaching Standards (NBPTS) was men-tioned in the QSI concept paper, and, inthe future, the state may acknowledgeNational Board Certification as a way forteachers to obtain advanced teachingcertificates. During the 1995-96 schoolyear, the SEA supported a cohort ofNBPTS teacher candidates by paying

their application fees, providing men-tors, and arranging released time. TheCarnegie Middle Grades Initiative, theAccelerated Schools program, and theEssential Schools initiative were all citedas influences on teacher professionaldevelopment.


State Funds. SEA funds assistdistricts and regions in carrying out theirprofessional development plans. In 1992and 1993, $4 million was distributed on aformula basis to districts. In the past, thestate appropriated approximately $10million per year to support its regionaleducation service centers. In FY 1995,$15 million was awarded to schoolsthrough competitive state-run grantprograms. The SEA Centers receivefunds for their own in-service activities.

Federal Funds. Illinois participatesin Goals 2000, receiving $15,992,571 in1996 for Year 2, of which 90 percent wasused for subgrants to local districts forlocal improvement efforts, professionaldevelopment, and preservice training.Ten percent of the funding supportedthe comprehensive state improvementplan by developing a system to docu-ment progress in meeting the nationalgoals, and by providing in-servicetraining for local education agencies.

The state receives Eisenhower fundsto support professional development forteachers. In FY 1995, Illinois received$10,904,237 from this source.

Local Funds. Local funds are thelargest source of funding for profes-sional development. Teacher licenserenewal fees paid to area ROEs are usedto provide professional developmentservices to teachers.


Districts are required by state law toconduct professional development ac-tivities and to design programs forcontinuing education to improve teach-ers' skills and knowledge. Theseprograms must serve district goals and

must focus on improving student learn-ing. The SEA provides a portion of thefunding for these activities.

The SEA approves district andregional professional development plansand provides funding for their develop-ment. The ROEs are now considered tobe intermediate service agencies forprofessional development and are re-quired to offer training in six differentsubject areas. ROE staff receive trainingthrough academies sponsored by theNational Staff Development Council(NSDC) and the state on mentoring andleadership development. The 45 ROEsare organized into six regional areas,each of which has a technology "hub"and a professional development director.Teacher training is developed based onlocal needs.

With the exception of Cook County,state regional superintendents in allIllinois counties can set aside a maximumof four days annually for professionaldevelopment activities. A maximum oftwo days can be used for teacherworkshops or institutes, and a maximumof two days can be spent on parent-teacher conferences and parent out-reach. State laws regarding education inChicago affect professional develop-ment in ways that sometimes differ fromthose pertaining to the rest of the state.


Teachers do not usually bargain forprofessional development at the locallevel, although in some instances re-lease time is negotiated. Teachers arecompensated for professional develop-ment costs and are given salary incre-ments for professional development indistricts where resources are available,but this practice varies widely by district.


Illinois teacher organizations aremajor providers of professional develop-ment for their members. They providesessions on collective bargaining, schoolfinance and law, academic training,mediation training, training to deal with

65

violence in schools, among other topics.The Illinois Education Association pro-vides specialized training for schoolsand regular workshops and conferencesfor its members. It funds a center foreducational innovation that focuses onschool reform issues. The center iscurrently working with a consortium ofapproximately 40 schools in the Chicagoarea.

The American Federation of Teach-ers-sponsored Quest Center in Chicagois well known for its professionaldevelopment work. The Quest Centerhas involved teachers in developing theChicago Learner Outcomes and increating a systemwide assessment basedon those outcomes. The Quest Centerholds weekly professional developmentactivities in various sites throughoutChicago. The Chicago Teachers Unionis seeking degree-granting authority inorder to create a professional graduateschool that would offer a master'sprogram in teacher leadership andeducation reform, and that would bealigned with current work on studentstandards and with NBPTS teacherstandards.

Illinois content-related teacher orga-nizations provide professional develop-ment conferences for their members. TheIllinois chapter of the Association forSupervision and Curriculum Develop-ment and the Association of IllinoisMiddle Schools also provide profes-sional development for their members.

Higher Education has not played asignificant role in shaping state policieson teacher professional development.They provide professional developmentassistance to local districts, uponrequest, and sponsor professional de-velopment schools in Illinois.


Anna AustinIllinois State Board of Education100 West Randolph Street, Suite 14-300Chicago, IL 60601312-814-2708

Sheryl PoggiIllinois State Board of Education100 West Randolph Street, Suite 14-300Chicago, IL 60601217-524-4832

Susan ShaeIllinois Education Association100 East EdwardsSpringfield, IL 62704




Copies of the teacher professionaldevelopment profiles are available onCPRE's home page at :


CC.


IndianaEducation Policy Context

Indiana's 292 school corporationsserved 968,933 students during the1994-95 school year, with a pupil-

teacher ratio of 17.5. In 1989, the stategranted school corporations "homerule," or the necessary powers toconduct their affairs, as long as thosepowers are not forbidden by statute ordelegated to another agency, are used ina manner consistent with prevailing statestatutes and rules, and are exercisedthrough written policies adopted by thecorporation's governing body.

Over the last decade, the state's rolein setting education policy has in-creased. At least four different legisla-tive reform packages have been passed,including the A+ Program for Educa-tional Excellence in 1987, the Governor'sExcel Program in 1989, the Bayh-EvansJoint Education Program in 1990, and theWork Force Development Act in 1992. Inaddition, the state's school fundingformula was revised in 1993. Reformefforts have addressed many aspects ofthe education enterprise, including ac-countability, standards and assessment,adult and workforce education, curricu-lum and instruction, early childhoodeducation, education governance, edu-cation professionals, educational tech-nology, instructional time, school fi-nance, school restructuring, and specialpopulations.




The provision of professional devel-opment for teachers varies from corpora-tion to corporation, but must meet staterequirements for school accreditation.School corporations generally determinethe level of local investment in profes-sional development, although thesematters are often negotiated with localteacher unions.

However, professional developmenthas become a significant topic ofdiscussion at the state level. Agovernor-appointed work group maderecommendations regarding potentialprofessional development initiatives inDecember of 1994. The work groupadvocated professional developmentpolicies that were attached to school andindividual goals, connected to existingstate initiatives, based on systemicchange and long-term commitments, andcompatible with state priorities as well asschoolwide plans.

The Indiana Professional StandardsBoard (IPSB) addresses the issues ofstandards for teachers, as well as teacherpreparation and continuing educationprograms. Legislation enacted in 1992created the IPSB and put the Divisions ofTeacher Certification, Teacher Educa-tion, and Teacher Testing and Continu-ing Education, and the BeginningTeacher Internship Program under its

jurisdiction. The IPSB is the agency thatissues the Indiana teaching credentialand maintains recertification require-ments. Its responsibilities includesetting and maintaining standards foreducators, beginning with preservicepreparation and continuing throughouttheir careers. The Board, whose mem-bers are primarily practicing educators,sets standards for professional educa-tion programs, teacher licensing andtesting, teacher induction, and continu-ing education.

Providing time for teachers topursue professional development isanother major issue that has receivedstate-level attention since 1987, whenthe legislature mandated that all 180school days be used for classroominstruction. The Indiana State Depart-ment of Education (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA)commissioned a study on the topic in1994, and a report was presented by theIndiana Education Policy Center atIndiana University in November of thatyear. "Professional Development andTeacher Time: Principles, Guidelines,and Policy Options for Indiana" de-scribes current thinking on effectiveprofessional development, state policiesin Indiana and surrounding statesregarding teacher professional develop-ment, guidelines for state policy andteacher time, and state options forproviding more time for teachers. Inaddition, Indiana is a partner state with

rhis profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andexulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Coloration of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National InstituteIn Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.[his profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in this publication are solely

hose of the authors.

6 7LA Lc: r PnPV AVAII ABLE

the National Commission on Teachingand America's Future and will undergo ateacher development policy audit, theresults of which will be used to institute acomprehensive plan for teacher profes-sional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. In-diana adopted the Beginning TeacherInternship Program in 1988-89. Sincethen, all first-year teachers have beenrequired to serve a one-year internshipwith a mentor teacher who is responsiblefor providing ongoing professionalsupport. Beginning teachers are givenfive days of release time, often used forobservation, and mentors are paid astipend of $600 for their efforts. Theschool's principal serves as the evalua-tor of the internship, periodically moni-toring the new teacher and determiningthe ultimate success of the internshipitself. Internship programs are devel-oped individually by school corpora-tions using guidelines provided by thestate. Failure to pass the BeginningTeacher Assessment Inventory pre-vents a teacher from practicing in anaccredited school. Since 1989, less than3 percent of all beginning teachers havehad to repeat the program or have beendenied permission to practice in anaccredited public school.

When teachers are initially certified,they receive a standard five-year licensethat enables them to teach in theirsubject field and grade level. After fiveyears, teachers must apply to the IPSBfor renewal of their certificates. Renewalrequires either six hours of approvedcoursework in a teacher's certificationarea, 90 continuing renewal units (CRUs),or any equivalent combination of thetwo. CRUs are only available forteachers who hold master's degrees orhave bachelor's degrees with 36 hours ofadditional academic credit. One CRU isawarded for every two hours of partici-pation in a Board-approved workshop orother educational experience.

Once teachers have obtained amaster's degree and five years ofexperience, they may apply for aprofessional license. A professionallicense is initially valid for ten years andis renewable every five years thereafter.It is important to note that these policies

2

have only been in effect since the 1987-88 school year. Prior to 1987, all teacherswere required to obtain a master's degreewithin six years of obtaining an initialcertificate. They were then granted a life-time license.

The IPSB is currently in the processof restructuring Indiana's entire licens-ing and recertification system. TheBoard has issued two reports outliningstrategies for redesigning the licensureprocess and has formed various advi-sory groups to address the matterfurther. The Board plans to have newregulations in place by August of 1998.

State-Supported Programs. Likemany states, Indiana does not have onecohesive state-level system for profes-sional development. However, oneoffice in the SEA does support profes-sional development linked to specificstate initiatives. The Office of Schooland Professional Development wasestablished in 1995 and supports theprofessional development efforts of theGifted and Talented Unit, Prime Time (astate-funded program to reduce classsize in the primary grades), the IndianaAcademic Improvement Program (for-merly Indiana 2000), Re:Learning, andteacher recognition programs. The SEAalso offers workshops and conferencesfor teachers, but attendance is notmandatory. It operates the IndianaPrincipal Leadership Academy, whichprovides professional development forpublic school principals.

Other state policies that extend to allschool corporations in Indiana havedirect impact on teacher professionaldevelopment. The two most prominentpolicies are Performance-Based Accredi-tation (PBA) and accumulated time.

Since 1987, all Indiana public schoolshave undergone PBA review every fiveyears in order to assess their compliancewith certain legal standards, schoolimprovement plans, and state perfor-mance standards. The state performancestandards are based on student atten-dance, high school graduation rates,state test results, and state proficienciesin math and language arts. Professionaldevelopment for teachers is addressed inthe PBA policy on the school improve-ment process as one of nine correlates

68

that schools must incorporate into theirown improvement plans. The PBApolicy states that professional develop-ment should be directly related to schoolimprovement and professional growthand that school faculties should beinvolved in planning professional devel-opment. The SEA provides professionaldevelopment to schools at their requestand also provides technical assistanceand professional development to schoolswhich do not receive the full five-yearaccreditation.

In 1990, the State Board of Educa-tion established a policy that allowsschools to release students in order toconduct professional development forteachers. In order to take advantage ofthe policy, schools must "bank" timeabove the required instructional time.Specifically, schools must acquire atleast 105 percent of required instruc-tional time before they are allowed to usein-school time for professional develop-ment. Students may only be releasedunder the provisions of an SEA-approved plan and cannot be releasedmore than six times in any school year.However, schools may add days to theircalendar in order to schedule release timefor professional development or otherpurposes.

The state also supports three otherprograms that include teacher profes-sional development as a major compo-nent: CLASS (Connecting LearningAssures Successful Students), the Indi-ana Academic Improvement Program(formerly Indiana 2000), and Re:Learning.Schools or school corporations competeto participate in these SEA-run pro-grams.

CLASS was developed in 1989, withthe goal of transforming schools intocommunities of life-long learning forteachers through a variety of profes-sional development activities. In orderfor a school to participate in CLASS, theprincipal and school corporation super -.intendent must agree in writing to a two-year commitment to the program.Through a variety of professionaldevelopment activities, teachers areexposed to cooperative learning, the-matic instruction, and other educationalinnovations. The program providesstipends for schools to cover release

time and supplies. There are 115 schoolsthat receive state support to participatein CLASS. An additional 30 schools whooriginally received state support for theprogram now continue to participate attheir own expense.

Since the passing of Indiana 2000legislation in 1991, the State Board ofEducation has selected certain schoolsto participate in the Indiana AcademicImprovement Program's restructuringprocess. Selected schools must adoptthe national education goals and workwith their communities to develop plansfor restructuring. The program providessmall grants to designated schools,waives certain state requirements, andpermits them to admit students who livewithin corporation boundaries but out-side the school's legal attendance area.According to the SEA, most of thefunding obtained by schools throughIndiana 2000 is used for professionaldevelopment.

Re:Learning is a collaborative effortof the Coalition for Essential Schoolsand the Education Commission of theStates. The program requires states tomake a five-year commitment to theproject and to pledge support forschools to develop frameworks forchange. The program focuses onimproving the relationship betweenteachers and students, relying heavilyon professional development for teach-ers. The state allocates funds to awardgrants to schools on a competitive basis.


State Funds. State funds arespecifically earmarked for professionaldevelopment, but these funds representa small portion of the state's educationbudget. Most of these funds fall underlarger initiatives, such as those men-tioned above. For the 1994-95 schoolyear, the state allocated approximately$427,000 for the PBA program's techni-cal assistance component, $1.8 millionfor the Beginning Teacher InternshipProgram, and $562,000 for the CLASSprogram. Since 1992, the state hasearmarked $675,000 per year for theIndiana Academic Improvement Pro-

gram, and $300,000 per year forRe:Learning.

Federal Funds. Federal funds alsosupport a significant portion of teacherprofessional development activities inthe state. As mentioned above, Indianais participating in Goals 2000. It alsoreceives Eisenhower and Title I funds,which are used to support professionaldevelopment. In FY 1995, Indianareceived $4,510,391 in Eisenhower fund-ing.

Local Funds. The most significantsource of funding for teacher profes-sional development in Indiana is thelocal school corporation. However, thelevel of funding varies from corporationto corporation.

The Impact of State Policeson Local ProfessionalDevelopment

As a part of the state's PBA policy,schools are required to plan professionaldevelopment for teachers and documenttheir activities. Local school corpora-tions are not required by the state tohave a specific local budget allocationfor professional development.

Schools are required by the state toperiodically evaluate all teachers on theirperformance in the classroom and tomake recommendations for their profes-sional improvement when necessary.The evaluation plans are developedlocally, following state guidelines. Plansmust include opportunities for growthand teacher development and mayultimately be used in making employ-ment decisions.

Schools are also permitted to accu-mulate time for teacher professionaldevelopment by extending the schoolday.


Professional development is bar-gained for on a local level in two ways.Time to pursue professional develop-ment is often negotiated, and teachersbargain for salary increments related tothe professional development they haveobtained.

6 9

Of 289 corporations surveyed in1994, 275 provided some type ofcontractual time for professional devel-opment. When district resources allow,teachers may be reimbursed for tuitionand other professional developmentexpenses. Policies vary from corporationto corporation.


Teacher organizations play signifi-cant local- and state-level roles in dis-cussions regarding teacher professionaldevelopment. They also provide profes-sional development for their members ona regular basis. The Indiana StateTeacher's Association (ISTA) holds atwo-day instructional conference eachyear that hosts a wealth of workshops.ISTA eventually wants to establishregional academies that would be col-laborations between local ISTA affiliatesand higher education institutions. TheIndiana Federation of Teachers, as wellas state teacher subject-matter organiza-tions, also provide professional devel-opment to their members.

Institutions of higher educationoffer professional development in vari-ous ways. An increasing number ofhigher education institutions work withprofessional development schools. Mostoffer courses, workshops, or summerprograms for relicensure purposes. Manyuniversities and colleges have devel-oped ongoing relationships with localschool corporations and provide profes-sional support to local school faculties.

There are ten education servicecenters in Indiana that were originallyestablished as purchasing cooperativesfor local school corporations. Some ofthese groups deliver professional devel-opment services to schools.

Independent consultants brought inby local school corporations are consid-ered to be the largest source ofprofessional development in the state.Professional development is also pro-vided by district personnel and SEAstaff.

The use of distance learning forteacher professional development isgaining a foothold in Indiana. Some

eta l UOPY AVAILABLE3

school districts utilize two-way videosystems to access providers who wouldhave been otherwise difficult or impos-sible to reach. In the State Department ofWorkforce Development, a new pro-gram, the Virtual School-to-Work Insti-tute, will provide professional develop-ment opportunities to teachers over theInternet.


Phyllis Land UsherSenior OfficerIndiana Department of EducationCenter for School Improvementand PerformanceRoom 229, StatehouseIndianapolis, IN 46204317-232-9101

Marilyn ScannelExecutive DirectorIndiana Professional Standards Board251 East Ohio Street, Suite 201Indianapolis, IN 46204 -9010317-232-9023

Dan ClarkInformation Services CoordinatorIndiana State Teachers Association150 West Market Street, Suite 900Indianapolis, IN 46204317-634-1515







IowaEducation Policy Context

Iiowa's K-12 public education systemis comprised of 379 districts anderves an average student enroll-

ment of 500,000. Iowa students consis-tently demonstrate a high level ofsuccess on nationally standardizedtests, which state officials attribute to aneducation policy that supports stronglocal control. There is no stateassessment, nor has the state adoptedcurriculum standards or graduationrequirements. In 1989, the Iowa GeneralAssembly passed sections 280.12 and280.18 of the Iowa Code, requiring theestablishment of high academic expecta-tions for all students. In keeping withIowa's tradition of strong local control,the state sets the parameters andprovides guidance, while districts main-tain responsibility for establishing theirown academic achievement goals andassessments. Districts must also reportstudent progress to the communitythrough an annual report. The state'sdistrict accreditation process incorpo-rates these requirements and providesthe mechanisms for monitoring theirimplementation.

Funding to support this schoolimprovement process was providedthrough the Educational ExcellenceProgram. Introduced in 1987, theprogram consists of three major phases:(I) recruitment of quality teachers; (II)



retention of quality teachers; and (III)enhancement of the quality and effec-tiveness of teachers. Phase I establishesa minimum starting teacher salary of$18,000, and Phase II supports teachersalary-scale increases. Phase III pro-vides pay incentives for superior perfor-mance and/or participation in trainingactivities or extra work assignments (e.g.,curriculum development and school-based decision making). The Educa-tional Excellence Program is supportedthrough an annual $80-million stateappropriation.

In January of 1991, the State Board ofEducation (SBE) revisited its reformagenda; after a year-long process ofmeeting with professional educators,business leaders, and community groupsacross the state, the SBE issued itsstrategic plan in December of 1992.Entitled, Education is Iowa's Future:The State Plan for Educational Excel-lence in the 21st Century, the reportrenews that state's commitment to highexpectations, teacher development andprofessional growth, education infra-structure, and local accountability. Asecond update of the strategic plan wasissued in March of 1994. Most recently,Iowa passed the School ImprovementTechnology Act (1996), which provides$150 million over the next five years fordistricts to purchase hardware andsoftware and to provide professionalstaff development for classroom instruc-

tional technology using the statewideIowa Communications Network.

Iowa's system of local autonomy isbalanced with a unique blend ofinfrastructure support, research-basedknowledge, and inter-agency coordina-tion. The New Iowa Schools Develop-ment Corporation (NISDC), establishedin 1991, is a nonprofit corporationgoverned by a board of directors thatincludes state-level organizations repre-senting teachers, parents, business,school administrators, local boards,state agencies, community colleges, andelected government officials. NISDCprovides a forum for collaboration,consensus building, and networking inthe areas of education reform and schoolimprovement. The FINE (First in theNation in Education) Foundation is astate-chartered, independent educationalresearch organization. Since the mid-1980s, FINE has implemented a researchagenda to improve teaching and learningin Iowa's K-12 classrooms by: gatheringinformation about and evaluating educa-tion trends/strategies; bringing educa-tional research into the classroom;disseminating practical research to edu-cators and policy makers; trainingeducators to use educational research;collaborating with Iowa educators toensure effective implementation of in-structional strategies; and sharing re-search results with regional laboratoriesand national research institutes.

this profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andwsulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.Phis profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelyhose of the authors.

71


There are no state-adopted stan-dards for the professional developmentof Iowa's educators. Iowa's schoolimprovement strategic plan has fourmajor goals, one of which is to "enhanceeducator's development and renewal inorder to increase opportunities of allstudents for productive lifelong learn-ing." The state encourages localdistricts to implement professional de-velopment activities by providing PhaseIII funds. Phase III funds are distributedto districts with state-approved plans forincentive pay that awards teachers fordemonstrated competence, participationin school improvement efforts, or partici-pation in professional growth trainingactivities. The intent of Phase DI is todevelop teachers as instructional lead-ers.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheIowa Board of Educational Examiners(BOEE) was established in statute by thestate legislature in 1989. The governor-appointed, 11-member Board is com-posed of five teachers, four administra-tors, an Iowa Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) representa-tive, and a non-certified lay-person whohas a demonstrated interest in educa-tion. The BOEE has authority to setpolicy on matters pertaining to thelicensure of all public school certifiedpersonnel. The BOEE also makesrecommendations to the SBE regardingstandards for the approval of profes-sional development programs.

Iowa currently uses a three-tierteacher licensure system. The Provi-sional License is issued upon comple-tion of all preservice requirements and isvalid for two years. After two years ofsuccessful teaching experience, teachersadvance to the Educational License.Teachers with five years of teachingexperience and a master's degree areeligible to receive a ProfessionalTeacher's License. Educational andProfessional Licenses may be renewedevery five years by accumulating re-newal unitseight and six units, respec-tively. One renewal unit is awarded forevery 15 contact hours and can be

2

earned through college credit andparticipation in approved staff develop-ment activities. The BOEE has estab-lished "renewal centers" in each of theArea Educational Agencies (see below)to provide teachers with easy access andsupport when applying for licensurerenewal. Formerly, this applicationprocess was only available through theSEA.

The BOEE spearheads the Renais-sance Initiative in Practitioner Licensure,which is revising the process and rulesfor licensure. The Initiative incorporatesrecommendations from the InterstateNew Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium (INTASC) and the NationalBoard for Professional Teaching Stan-dards (NBPTS) and is based upon twoguiding principles: developing licensurestandards, and developing a practitionerframework that emphasizes a continuumapproach from "initial preparationthrough induction to life-long profes-sional development." The BOEE issueda concept paper in December of 1995 thatwas disseminated to practitioners andeducator associations for review. Thepaper presents examples of the newteaching standards and identifies ten"basic principles" for beginning teach-ers. It proposes a revised system oflicensure that would include an initiallicense, a continuing license (issuedupon completion of an induction pro-gram), and an advanced license (issuedwith eight years of teaching experienceand a master's degree or National BoardCertification). The paper also proposesexpanding the range of endorsementareas and providing greater flexibility inthe earning of renewal units. Formaladoption of all proposed modifications isexpected by 1998; complete implementa-tion should occur by the year 2002.

The proposed induction programprovides mentoring support to begin-ning teachers. Under this program, newteachers would be assigned a trainedmentor during their first year. Mentorsand beginning teachers would receivethe equivalent of five days of releasetime to participate in planning, demon-stration, observation, and feedback andinduction workshops. Mentors wouldreceive a $1,000 stipend, paid by thedistrict. Districts that volunteer to

'72

implement an induction program wouldreceive a state allocation of $250 for eachbeginning teacher and be required toestablish a district committee and toappoint a district facilitator to overseeimplementation. The BOEE wouldappoint a Director of Induction (housedwithin the SEA) to review and approvelocal induction plans, monitor mentortraining in accordance with BOEEguidelines, and provide technical assis-tance to induction facilitators at thedistrict level. The induction concept wasadopted by the SBE in 1996, and theBOEE is seeking $1.9 million from thestate to support this activity during1997-98.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA provides limited direct professionaldevelopment services to districts. Thestate uses a regional provider systemcomprised of Area Education Agencies(AEAs). Created by the Iowa legislaturein 1974, the 15 AEAs provide state andfederally required special educationservices, certain specified media ser-vices, and other educational services asdetermined by a local governing boardrepresenting the school districts of aservice area. In addition, the Technol-ogy Act requires AEAs to providedistricts with technology planning andtechnology-related staff development.AEAs serve as intermediate unitsbetween the SEA and local districts.Funding support for AEAs is generatedthrough direct state aid, local propertytaxes, and grants. AEAs also may applyfor Phase III funds from the state.Federal and private funds are also used,and additional fees may be collectedthrough direct management servicecontracts with individual districts.

The SEA works collaboratively withAEAs and, in 1994, formed the AEA/Department of Education (AEA/DE)Collaborative "to identify strategies,avoid duplication of efforts, fill gaps inservice, and develop a truly cohesivesystem of service support." TheCollaborative meets twice each year todetermine roles and responsibilities andstrengthen communication among edu-cation service providers in the state. TheService Coordinating Council carries outthe work of the AEA/DE Collaborative.One focal area of the Council's work is

professional development. The Councilis developing resources to identify bestpractices, staff development providers,and other materials that link to stan-dards-based reform.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Iowa is using a federal StarSchool Grant to fund Technology-BasedCurriculum Development Projects acrossthe state. This mini-grant program seeksto encourage partnerships focused oninstructional technology among dis-tricts, AEAs, higher education institu-tions, and businesses. Through thisproject, the partnerships will developand share instructional materials thatincorporate distance learning. Teacherswill receive training in the use of distancelearning applications. Under the IowaCommunications Network (ICN), theIowa Distance Education Alliance (IDEA)is developing an electronic link to makethe necessary software applicationsavailable to all K-12 school districts bythe year 2000. Six Star School grants (upto $200,000 per project) will be awardedin 1996-97.

Goals 2000 funds are allocated tosupport local school improvement plan-ning efforts.

Public Funds forProfessional Development

State Funds. The state does notprovide categorical aid to districts forprofessional development. However,through the Educational ExcellenceProgram, an annual appropriation of $26million is available for distribution todistricts who apply for Phase III funds,which provide salary incentives forcertain instructional duties and/or staffdevelopment. These funds must directlysupport staff development and otheractivities that promote the districts'student achievement goals. Phase IIIallocations average $800 per teacher.

The state has earmarked $450,000 oftechnology funds to be distributedamong the AEAs for the purpose ofproviding technical assistance to dis-tricts. AEAs are required to submit atechnology plan to the SEA for approval.

Federal Funds. During the 1995-96school year, Iowa received a $2.2-million

Eisenhower grant and a $3.2-millionGoals 2000 grant. Iowa is using a $1.2-million Star Schools grant to support itstechnology-based curriculum project.

Local Funds. Local set-asides forprofessional development are not re-quired. Districts that apply for Phase IIIfunds employ a variety of incentiveoptions that are determined by localschool boards. Districts may also useTechnology Act funds to supportprofessional development.

The AEAs are primarily fundedthrough local budgets, based on astudent enrollment formula that includespublic and accredited nonpublic schoolsserved by the AEAs. Each AEAallotment represents their service areastudent enrollment multiplied by theaverage per-pupil cost of servicesprovided by the AEA. In 1994-95, thetotal AEA allocation for special educa-tion services (partly funded throughstate aid) was $84.5 million, or $155 perstudent; $15.7 million for media services,or $29 per student; and $17.3 million foreducational services, or $32 per student.


Districts are required to develop andsubmit school improvement plans to theSEA, in accordance with sections 280.12and 280.18. To augment their plans,districts may apply for Phase HI funds,which are distributed based on propos-als developed by the districts andapproved by the SEA. Although districtparticipation in Phase III programming isvoluntary, during the 1995-96 schoolyear, every district in the state partici-pated. When the SEA conducted itsevaluation of Phase III in 1989-90, all buttwo districts had received Phase IIIfunds. More than half (58 percent)implemented a combination pay plan,containing both performance-based andsupplemental pay incentives; 38 percentused all of their funds for supplementalpay. Participating districts and teachersreported a high degree of satisfactionwith the program and indicated thatPhase III was accomplishing its goals asintended by the legislature.

73

There is no statewide minimumrequirement for professional develop-ment days. The official school-yearcalendar consists of 180 instructionaldays. Most districts negotiate a 190-daycontract to allow for other non-instruc-tional activities. Iowa districts may alsoseek waivers to reschedule the schoolday or school year in order to accumulatemore time for collegial planning and staffdevelopment activities.


Teacher salaries are negotiatedthrough local bargaining agreements.Generally, teachers are awarded stepincreases based on years of experienceand graduate degrees or credits earnedbeyond the bachelor's. Districts havethe option of using Phase L11 funds toprovide tuition or travel reimbursementfor teachers who attend college courses,conferences, or workshops. Most often,Phase III funds are used to pay teachersfor work that supports the district'sschool improvement plan. According toan SEA evaluation of Phase III activitiesconducted during the 1989-90 schoolyear, 87 percent of Iowa's teachersreceived incentive pay; 21 percentreceived reimbursement for workshop/conference fees; 15 percent receivedreimbursement for travel to attendtraining events; and 11 percent receivedtuition reimbursement.


The Iowa State Education Associa-tion (ISEA) actively promotes policiesthat support professional development.The ISEA works collaboratively withstate policy makers, AEAs, universities,and local districts to enhance the qualityof professional growth opportunities forIowa's teachers. In 1968, the ISEAfounded the concept of "cadre-training,"when it began implementing the MobileIn-service Teaching Laboratory (MISTL).MISTL is a day-long, in-service activitythat offers participants an array of topicareas to meet professional growth needs.

The goals of MISTL are to providehands-on training and material that canbe used on the next day of instructionand to offer teachers a stimulatingalternative for learning new skills andchanging practices. Recent MISTLshave featured Methods and Techniquesof Teaching Reading, Wellness forTeachers (stress management), andUsing Telecommunications Technol-ogy. Each year, ISEA selects five sites tohost this initiative, which costs $5,000per site and requires a minimum of 250participants. Over 150 Iowa districtshave served as MISTL co-sponsors.The program is offered free as aprofessional development service of theISEA.

The BOEE has expressed interest inpiloting a professional developmentschool (PDS) in the state and is workingwith Iowa State University to conduct astudy of national trends and local needsfor the establishment of a PDS. Institu-tions of higher education (IHEs) in Iowahave concentrated on degree-drivenprograms as their primary contribution tothe professional development of teach-ers. IHEs are not authorized to awardcontinuing education units; however,under revisions proposed by the BOEE,this option may soon become available.It would enhance the range of courseofferings and professional developmentactivities offered by colleges and univer-sities.

The Institute for Collaborative Lead-ership in Education at Drake University'sSchool of Education has a ResourceCenter (RC) that provides educationalresources and support services to stateand local school personnel regardingindividuals with disabilities. The RCoffers technical assistance on activitiessuch as staff development, behavioralassessment, parents and families, andlegal/policy matters. The RC houses theMountain Plains Regional ResourceCenter (a federally funded, multi-stateproject), the Parent-Education Connec-tion, and the Iowa Learning ResourceNetwork. These programs providetraining, conferences, resource materi-als, and networking venues for Iowaeducators.

The IOWA/US WEST TeacherTechnology Project was created in 1995through the joint collaboration of the USWEST Foundation, the University ofNorthern Iowa (UNI), the SEA, profes-sional and school associations, localschool districts, public television, andthe AEAs. The Project's goal is toprovide training and resources to IowaK-12 educators to become proficient inthe use and instructional application ofcomputer-based telecommunications.Using the ISEA's cadre-based, trainer-of-trainers delivery model, the Project isexpected to provide a series of 15 three-day training workshops to a total of 400teachers in the summer of 1997. Duringthe 1997-98 school year, these teacherswill be responsible for training tenadditional teachers within their homedistricts. UNI faculty will design andoversee the summer training workshops,and the regional AEAs will provide localassistance and support to teacher-trainers during the year. Trainingparticipants will be eligible to receivelicense renewal units or graduate creditthrough participating universities. TheProject receives funding support througha combination of private, state, andfederal sources.


Dwight CarlsonAssistant to the DirectorIowa Department of EducationGrimes State Office BuildingDes Moines, IA 50319-0146515-281-3436

Orrin NearhoofExecutive DirectorState Board of Educational ExaminersGrimes State Office BuildingDes Moines, IA 50319-0147515-281-5849

James H. SuttonStaff Specialist for Professional IssuesIowa State Education Association4025 Tonawanda DriveDes Moines, IA 50311-3418515-279-9711

74






`PRE Teacher Professional Development Profile

KansasEducation Policy Context

Kransas is implementing an educa-tion reform agenda that isesults-oriented and high-stakes.

The State Board of Education (SBE)initiated major reform efforts in 1989 byissuing Strategic Directions, a philo-sophical framework for lifelong learning.Strategic Directions emphasizes seveneducation program goals: early child-hood education, results-oriented cur-riculum and instruction, student-cen-tered learning environments, parentalinvolvement, staff development, learn-ing communities, and business involve-ment.

The cornerstone of the currentreform initiative is Quality PerformanceAccreditation (QPA). Adopted by theSBE in 1991, QPA uses curriculumstandards, a performance-based assess-ment system, and at least two otherlocally-determined measures to holdschools accountable for demonstratingstudent progress. Statewide task forcesconsisting of educators, communitymembers, and business representativesdeveloped the curriculum standards.Recommendations from these groupswere reviewed by content-area experts toensure the standards met "world-class"expectations. In 1993, the SBE officiallyreceived curriculum standards for math-ematics, science, communications (read-ing and writing), and social studies. Thestandards will be reviewed periodically



by the state curricular advisory commit-tees and modified as needed, with theSBE reviewing each revision as it iscompleted.

The SBE has contracted with theCenter for Educational Testing andEvaluation (CETE) at the University ofKansas to design, administer, score, andanalyze the results of the state assess-ment system for QPA. CETE workscollaboratively with educators at thestate and local levels to design theassessments. When assessment resultsare reported, they reference a Standardof Excellence that establishes profi-ciency standards for building perfor-mance in relation to average studentperformance. Schools are expected tomake progress toward the buildingperformance standards. The new stateassessment for mathematics and readingare administered annually. Writing,science, and social studies assessmentsare administered every two years.

In addition to student learningoutcomes, QPA examines process indi-cators including indicators of staff de-velopment and professional growth.QPA requires the development of site-based councils and requires schoolimprovement plans to be submitted tothe SBE each accreditation cycle. Theplan must include a staff developmentcomponent that identifies three staffdevelopment priorities and providesdocumentation on how staff develop-ment activities have affected instruc-tional strategies. QPA's emphasis on

the role teacher professional develop-ment plays in student learning andschool improvement is consistent withthe SBE's long-term commitment to thisarea. As described below, the ongoingtraining and professional growth ofKansas teachers has been and remains apolicy priority.


The SBE adopted an official profes-sional development policy for Kansaspublic school educators in 1972, identi-fying this area as a key educational goalfor school improvement. It was not until1981, however, that a state plan forteacher in-service activities was created.This preliminary plan provided the basisfor a 1983 pilot effort of the KansasInservice Education Program (KIP). KIPencourages local decision making andlong-range planning for staff develop-ment. Participating districts are requiredto establish a professional developmentcouncil, conduct an in-service needsassessment, and develop a five-year in-service education plan that outlinesobjectives, activities to be conducted,and evaluation criteria. The plan issubmitted to the SBE for approval. In1985, the Kansas legislature passed theState Inservice Opportunity Act, whichprovided funding specifically to supportKIP activities. The funding allocationwas instrumental in expanding the

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

tj

voluntary program that, in 1992, becamea statewide mandate. In 1994, theInservice Education Opportunities Actwas amended, and the SBE guidelines forKIP activities were modified to promoteresults-based staff development. Schoolsare now required to report annually onthe implementation of their staff devel-opment priorities for school improve-ment. Each school is also required todevelop a long-range results-based staffdevelopment plan to support theirschool improvement efforts.

The Kansas Staff DevelopmentCouncil (KSDC), an affiliate of theNational Staff Development Council(NSDC), was established in 1989. Itassists state and local educators indesigning and implementing staff devel-opment activities. The KSDC and SBEcollaborated in 1992 to prepare a policypaper, entitled Results Based StaffDevelopment, which was developed inresponse to QPA's process indicatorsfor staff development. Results-basedstaff development shifts the focus of in-service planning and evaluation awayfrom numbers of participants, teachersatisfaction ratings, and accumulation ofin-service credits. Instead, the designand evaluation of in-service activities isdetermined by whether or how thetraining aligns with the overall schoolimprovement process and the degree towhich teachers' instructional strategiesand student learning skills are improvedas a result of in-service activities. TheSBE provided ten one-day trainingsessions (at different locations acrossthe state) on the process of developingand implementing results-based staffdevelopment. Using a trainer-of-trainersmodel, cadres of educators are availableto assist districts and schools inimplementing the framework of effectivestaff development: knowledge, demon-stration, practice, feedback and coach-ing, and follow-up.

In addition, Kansas is a partner statewith the National Commission on Teach-ing and America's Future and willundergo a teacher development policyaudit, the results of which will be used toinstitute a comprehensive plan forteacher professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheKansas Teaching and School Adminis-

tration Professional Standards AdvisoryBoard (PSB) was established in 1969 andreconfigured in 1984 for the purpose ofdeveloping and recommending rules andregulations for teacher and administratorstandards, selection, preparation, andrecertification. The 21-member SBE-appointed PSB consists of ten classroomteachers, seven school administrators,two school of education representatives,one PTA member and one local schoolboard representative.

In 1993, the SBE charged the PSBwith providing recommendations for theredesign of teacher preparation andcertification policies to reflect a perfor-mance-based licensing system. In itsinitial draft, entitled The Redesign ofLicensure of Kansas Educators, the PSBidentified a continuum of professionalgrowth beginning with Phase I, which ispreservice preparation. Phase II wouldconsist of an extended field-basedpreparatory period, called the Condi-tional License Period, during whichbeginning educators would be requiredto demonstrate the dispositions andperformances necessary to obtain pro-fessional licensure. This demonstrationwould occur in a school setting withprofessional support provided by a localeducation agency, a teacher educationinstitution, and the SBE. Upon success-ful completion of Phase II, the educatorwould advance to Phase III, duringwhich requirements for licensure renewalare established through a joint teacher/district decision-making process andrevised periodically to ensure continuedprofessional growth. The PSB is refiningcomponents of the proposed three-stageprocess, and final recommendations willbe submitted to the SBE in May of 1997.

Under existing teacher certificationpolicies in the state of Kansas, newteachers are issued a three-year InitialCertificate. After completing two yearsof teaching experience, teachers areupgraded to the five-year StandardCertificate, which is renewable uponcompletion of college credit hours, in-service education points, or a combina-tion of both.

A state-supported Internship Pro-gram for first-year teachers was pilotedfrom 1985-89. The state model createdschool-based assistance teams (consist-

76

ing of administrators and senior teach-ers) to provide guidance and evaluatenew teacher performance during the firstyear. Originally, new teachers wereissued a one-year certificate, and school-based assistance teams were givenauthority for determining teachers' ad-vancement to the standard certificate.However, the program's linkage tocertification was dropped in 1989,because assistance team members re-ported that their interaction with newteachers had become too evaluative innature; much less time was being spentproviding nurturance and non-judgmen-tal support. Funding to expand theInternship Program was not extendedbeyond the pilot phase. Nonetheless,SBE officials report that many districtshave developed beginning teacher sup-port programs on their own. It is alsoanticipated that the new teacher certifi-cation policies currently being devel-oped by the PSB will include regulationsmodeled after the internship program.

State-Supported Programs. TheKansas State Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) providesprofessional development services tolocal systems through a variety ofprogram offices and federal grants fortechnical education, student supportservices, community colleges and com-munity education. SEA staff workcollaboratively with the KSDC to con-duct training activities and respond tolocal requests for on-site, in-serviceplanning and implementation. The SEAis also in the process of expanding itsmanagement information system to in-clude information on technical assis-tance and training resources availablethroughout the state. This staffdevelopment electronic link is expectedto be fully operational by 1997-98.

Frequently, state-supported staffdevelopment services are providedthrough 11 regional Education ServiceCenters (ESCs). Established in 1986, theESCs provide resource support, techni-cal assistance, and training opportuni-ties to clusters of districts located in theirservice areas. The ESCs offer in-serviceactivities related to QPA reforms (e.g.,training on aligning curriculum to statestandards, on interpreting and utilizing

assessment results, and on team-build-ing skills).

An SEA program consultant forstaff development coordinates the Kan-sas Inservice Program and the staffdevelopment component for QPA. Forthe past seven years, the SEA hassponsored an annual "Effective SchoolsConference" in the spring. This two-dayevent assembles, on average, 700 Kan-sas educators to focus on topics andtechniques that have proven to promoteeffective schooling. For the past 11years, the SEA has also co-sponsoredthe Spring Staff Development Leader-ship Conference with KSDC, whichprovides staff developers, administra-tors, and teachers with up-to-dateknowledge and skills in the qualityresults-based staff development prac-tices in place across the state and thenation.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Kansas' Goals 2000Preservice Teacher Education and Pro-fessional Development subgrants areavailable to local districts in partnershipwith institutions of higher education andother non-profit organizations to im-prove preservice education programsand support ongoing professional de-velopment for teachers and administra-tors. Approximately 26 grants of up to$25,000 have been awarded on acompetitive basis each year. Thesesubgrants involve 150 districts andserve 291,718 students.

Eisenhower Professional Develop-ment Programs in Mathematics andScience are supported by federal Title Hdollars. For the past three years, fundinghas been provided to sponsor theSummer Science Leadership Institutes,which prepares cadres of trained teach-ers who are well-versed in current trendsin science teaching and who provideworkshops for other science teachers inKansas. Participants commit to provid-ing a minimum of five days of in-servicetraining to other teachers throughout thefollowing school year. The KansasMathematics Leadership Academy pro-vides a year-long professional develop-ment opportunity for 80 K-12 educatorseach year. It includes a four-day summerinstitute focusing on the Kansas Math-ematics Curriculum Standards, two-day

seminars in the fall and spring that focuson assessment in mathematics andresearch-based instructional strategiesfor the classroom, and distance learningsessions broadcasted throughout theschool year that address national, state,and classroom issues in mathematicseducation. Other professional develop-ment activities include: MathematicsAcademies, which train a cadre of over150 K-12 teachers on standards and stateassessments, a videotaped professionaldevelopment series in math and one inscience, and workshops on problem-solving.

The Carl Perkins Applied Technol-ogy and Vocational Educational Actprovides funding for professional devel-opment for secondary and postsecondaryinstructors in institutions with state-approved vocational education pro-grams. The funding may be used forboth in-state and out-of-state in-serviceactivities as well as for release time forcurriculum development as part of anapproved program improvement plan.The minimum grant for secondaryprograms is $15,000, and the minimum forpostsecondary programs is $50,000.Professional development activities musttarget the priorities of the Perkinslegislation.

A content standards grant from theU.S. Department of Education providesprofessional development for Kansaseducators in the field of communicationarts. This includes reading, writing,speaking, listening, and viewing curricu-lum, instruction, and classroom assess-ment. The grant has provided freeworkshops for all Kansas educators and,during 1996-97, is paying the registrationfees and expenses for 30 teachers.


State Funds. State appropriationsfor KIP have steadily increased from aninitial 1985 allocation of $750,000 to afunding level of $5.4 million during 1995-96. The state legislature cut the fundinglevel by $1.5 million in 1996-97.

Federal Funds. Many schools anddistricts receive funding from federalsources such as Goals 2000, Eisenhower,

and Title I. A total of $566,091 in Goals2000 funds were awarded to localeducation agencies in 1995-96 for part-nership activities with institutions ofhigher education. Kansas received$2,239,382 in federal Eisenhower Pro-fessional Development funds in 1995-96.

Local Funds. District-sponsoredprofessional development is generallyfunded by KIP and federal sources.Districts have the option of paying feesto participate in services provided by theESCs.


Under QPA, schools are required todemonstrate process outcomes, one ofwhich includes professional develop-ment. Schools must design andimplement a staff development plan thatlinks in-service activities to the goalsoutlined in school improvement plans.Site-based councils are responsible forreviewing the training needs and activi-ties presented in the plan. Schools mustsubmit an annual report that documentsthe progress made on QPA outcomes.Staff development activities are mea-sured according to teachers' implemen-tation of training techniques and con-cepts in the classroom and, wheredocumented, their effects on studentlearning.

KlPrequires all districts to establisha professional development council toconduct periodic in-service needs as-sessments and to develop and overseethe implementation of the district's five-year in-service plan. Districts with state-approved in-service plans are eligible toreceive a 60 percent reimbursement fromthe state for expenses related to KIPactivities. Inservice plans must be basedon needs identified at the individual,building, and district levels. When KIPbecame a mandated program in 1992, theKansas legislature required districts toprovide at least three in-service daysduring the school year. Currently,however, there is no minimum in-serviceday requirement. SEA officials estimatethat most districts allot between two andten in-service days, with an averagenumber of six per year.


Teachers often receive reimburse-ment for expenses related to professionaldevelopment activities through districtinvolvement in KIP and other grantprograms. Since 1985, teachers havebeen able to accumulate in-serviceeducation points to renew their certifica-tion and, in some districts, to advance onlocal salary schedules. Decisionsregarding teacher compensation forprofessional development are deter-mined at the local level.


The Kansas National EducationAssociation (KNEA) is a major providerof teacher professional development.Through its Instructional Advocacy andUniSery programs, KNEA offers trainingworkshops and responds to requests forstaff development at the state and locallevels. In addition, KNEA sponsors anannual, one-day Spring InstructionalConference that provides workshops oninstructional themes. KNEA also pub-lishes a catalog of its instructionaladvocacy programs.

The Jones Institute for EducationalExcellence is housed in the TeachersCollege at Emporia State University.Formed in 1982, the Jones Instituteconducts research and provides techni-cal assistance in the areas of educationreform and best practices. Instituteactivities concentrate on special projects,sponsored research, publications, andconferences. In 1992, the Institutebecame one of 27 field-test sites acrossthe country to receive a grant from theNational Board of Professional TeacherStandards (NBPTS) to assist teachers inobtaining National Board Certification.Since then, the Institute has providedNational Board Certification preparationclasses and other resource support toover 50 teachers from Kansas, Okla-homa, Missouri, and Nebraska. Throughcontinued funding from Emporia StateUniversity, the Institute is expanding its

efforts to promote National BoardCertification by meeting with statelegislators and the SBE.

The Kansas Alliance of ProfessionalDevelopment Schools ( KAPDS) wasofficially formed in 1991 by the Univer-sity of Kansas as an outgrowth of theUniversity's work with the HolmesGroup. In conjunction with area publicschools and business leaders, theUniversity of Kansas established anExecutive Council and identified fourKAPDS sites. Each KAPDS sitedeveloped a three-year improvementplan. Approximately 200 teachers areinvolved in KAPDS activities, whichinclude a two-day summer institute,school- and university-based profes-sional development throughout theschool year, and a winter banquet.KAPDS funds support a Universityliaison for each site and pay for teachersubstitutes. Program funds are providedby the University of Kansas at $30,000per year.


Dale DennisDeputy CommissionerKansas Department of Education120 SE Tenth AvenueTopeka, KS 66612-1182913-296-3202

Kathy BoyerEducation Program Consultantfor Staff DevelopmentKansas Department of Education120 SE Tenth AvenueTopeka, KS 66612-1182913-296-3798

Sharrilyn HonackiPresidentKansas Staff Development CouncilUSD #204 Bonner Springs2200 S. 138th StreetBonner Springs, KS 66012913-422-5600


for 1993.






KentuckyEducation Policy Context

Kientucky's public schools serveover 650,000 students who at-end school in 176 districts. The

districts vary widely in size, ranging fromJefferson County, which includes Louis-ville, to small independent districts likePaintsville. Kentucky has undergonemore changes in its public educationsystem in the last ten years than anyother state in the nation. In addition, nostate has been more closely watched bythe educational community and otherstakeholders as it implements statewideeducation reforms. In 1989, the KentuckySupreme Court delivered a landmark de-cision, ruling that the state's publicschool system was unconstitutional andfurther describing the conditions itdeemed to be essential and minimalcharacteristics of an efficient system ofcommon (public) schools. The GeneralAssembly used this opportunity to re-think all aspects of the state's educ-ationsystem and created a Task Force onEducation Reform. The Task Forceformed committees on curriculum, fi-nance, and governance, which workedwith consultants and stakeholders to de-velop recommendations. Based on theserecommendations, the General Assem-bly drafted the Kentucky EducationReform Act (KERA), which became lawon July 13, 1990. The Act was amendedin each subsequent session of the Gen-eral Assemblyin 1992,1994, and 1996.



ICERA' s components include: edu-cational goals indicating what graduatesshould know and be able to do; anassessment process to determine ifstudents are reaching these goals; anaccountability system holding schoolsresponsible for student success; in-creased funding for professional devel-opment activities for educators to helpstudents succeed; a new system forcredentialing teachers; early childhoodprograms; funding to help students whorequire more time to achieve academicsuccess; a major commitment to technol-ogy; full-service schools inclusive ofcommunity and agency resources;changes in the governance structure toalter the politics in Kentucky schooldistricts; and an equalized fundingsystem, as well as a commitment to fundthe new initiatives.

The legislation also addressed policystructures. The position of the electedSuperintendent of Public Instructionwas abolished in 1992 by an amendmentto Kentucky's constitution, and almostall of this position's duties weretransferred to the appointed Commis-sioner of Education. KERA alsoabolished the existing Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) on June30, 1991, and reorganized it to includenew positions and a new service-oriented mission, effective July 1, 1991.The credentialing of teachers was movedfrom the SEA to the Education Profes-

sional Standards Board, an autonomousbody appointed by the governor. KERAalso established the Office of EducationAccountability (OEA) under the Legisla-tive Research Commission (LRC). Themission of OEA is to monitor the publiceducation system and the implementa-tion of KERA. The State Board ofEducation (SBE) is comprised of 11members appointed by the governor andconfirmed by the General Assembly andis responsible for managing the publicschools, adopting policies for the SEA,and hiring and evaluating the Commis-sioner of Education.


High-quality, timely, and accessibleprofessional development is regarded asbeing critical to the success of KERA.Statutes, regulations, and department-issued program advisories all reinforcethe importance of professional develop-ment to successful educational reform.KERA addresses professional develop-ment by:

requiring local districts to use fourdays of the minimum school term forprofessional development (districtswere permitted to request up to fiveadditional instructional days forprofessional development from the1992-93 school year through the1995-96 school year );



( 9 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

requiring schools to provide profes-sional development programs andshifting responsibility for planningprofessional development to schoolstaff;

providing funding at $23 per aver-age daily attendance (ADA) ofstudents in 1996-97; and

allocating responsibility for 65 per-cent of the funds for professionaldevelopment to school-based deci-sion-making councils.

The professional development regu-lations promulgated by the SBE wererevised in May of 1995. The regulationsoutline the professional developmentprocess; create standards for school anddistrict professional development plans;and delineate the responsibilities andauthority of the district professionaldevelopment coordinator. In addition,Kentucky is a partner state with theNational Commission on Teaching andAmerica's Future and will undergo ateacher development policy audit, theresults of which will be used to institute acomprehensive plan for teacher profes-sional development.

Teacher Certification Policies.Kentucky has a three-tiered certificationsystem. Initial certification begins atRank III, which requires a bachelor'sdegree and the completion of aninternship. Rank II teachers must hold amaster's degree or have completed aplanned, fifth-year program. For fifth-year programs, professional develop-ment tied to an individual's professionalgrowth plan may be substituted for up to12 college credits, if approved by thecollege. Rank! requires 30 hours beyondthe master's degree, acquired withineight years of attaining a BA. Recently,the state passed legislation allowingteachers to use National Board Certifica-tion as a substitute for graduate work toattain Rank I status.

The Education Professional Stan-dards Board is comprised of 17 members,including the Chief State School Officerand the Executive Director of the Councilon Higher Education, who serve as ex-officio voting members. The remainingmembers, appointed by the governor, are

nine teachers, one member of a localboard of education, one principal, onesuperintendent, two deans of publiccolleges of education, and one chiefadministrator from an independent col-lege or university.

By statute, the Board is authorized:(1) to establish standards and require-ments for obtaining and maintaining ateaching certificate; (2) to issue, renew,suspend, and revoke teaching certifi-cates; (3) to reduce and streamline thecredentialing system to allow greaterflexibility in staffing local schools, whilemaintaining standards for teacher com-petence; (4) to develop a ProfessionalCode of Ethics; (5) to set standards for,approve, and evaluate teacher prepara-tion programs; (6) to maintain data andsubmit reports to the governor and theGeneral Assembly on employment trends,the performance of certified personnel,and the quality of professional prepara-tion programs; and (7) to study theproblem of the declining pool of minorityteachers in Kentucky and submit recom-mendations for increasing their numbers.

The Board has been active instandards setting, piloting performance-based assessments with the InterstateNew Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium (INTASC), and streamliningcertification. In addition, they haverevised Kentucky's ten-year-old NewTeacher Intern Program, incorporatingstandards as the basis for decisionmaking and adopting a system that be-gins with entry into the teacher pre-paration program and that spans thecompletion of the intern program. Newteachers and out-of-state teachers withless than two years of successfulteaching experience are issued a provi-sional certificate and are required to passwritten tests and to complete a one-yearinternship. They are assigned a co-mmittee that includes a principal, aresource teacher, and a teacher educatorappointed by a regional university. Thissupport committee is trained in a state-developed supervision and assessmentprocess and engages the new teacher inclinical supervision. Although theprogram guidelines fall under the juris-diction of the Board, the program itself isfunded through a separate line item inthe SEA' s budget. Kentucky is also part

80

of the National Council for the Accredi-tation of Teacher Education's (NCATE)New Professional Teacher Project anduses NCATE standards for the accredi-tation of teacher training institutions.

State-Supported Programs. Thestate supports reforms in schools anddistricts through eight regional servicecenters (RSCs). RSC staff includeconsultants with expertise in technol-ogy, curriculum and assessment, school-based decision making, instructionalstrategies in writing, extended schoolservices, and exceptional child educa-tion. The state has also created districtconsortia through which local systemscombine resources to make professionaldevelopment opportunities and otherneeded services more accessible andresponsive to the needs of schools anddistricts. Originally, districts wererequired to join these professionaldevelopment consortia; however, thisrequirement has recently been rescinded.It is too early to determine whetherdelivery systems will change signifi-cantly.

Although the SEA provides profes-sional development services through itsProfessional DevelopmentDivision, otherSEA units also offer teacher training.Technology training is coordinatedthrough the Office of Technology, and asignificant investment is being made toprepare teachers and administrators touse the Kentucky Educational Technol-ogy System (KETS). Training and otherprofessional development experiencesrelated to assessment and curriculumdevelopment are coordinated by theOffice of Curriculum, Assessment, andAccountability. This office has devel-oped a teacher cadre, called KERAFellows, who have volunteered to betrained in curriculum, instruction, andassessment. These teachers remain intheir districts and act as professionaldevelopment resources. RSCs offer aprogram called RSC Associates, who areteachers trained in systems thinking andmeeting management techniques andwho participate in a network to increaseregional capacity. Other teacher net-works and cadres have been developed,such as writing cluster leaders, mathportfolio resource teachers, the giftedand talented professional development

cadre, school technology coordinators,and the elementary resource teachernetworkall of which are building localcapacity to assist teachers with newclassroom practices.

In addition, the Office of SchoolImprovement identifies and trains Distin-guished Educators (DEs). DEs arehighly skilled teachers and administra-tors who are released from their districtobligations to spend two years provid-ing technical assistance to schools inother districts, particularly those identi-fied through the accountability systemas being "in crisis." DEs worked with 53schools in 1995-96, and a vast majoritymade significant gains in student perfor-mance. The number of schools requiringor requesting DEs increased for 1996-97;however, budget cuts have reduced theirnumber to 40.

Teachers have taken on new leader-ship roles as members of school-baseddecision-making councils. In 1996, theGeneral Assembly directed that all newmembers of councils participate in aminimum of six clock hours of training,with an annual follow-up of three clockhours. The SEA approves trainingproviders, but does not specify thecontent, which is determined locallybased on individual council needs. Inaddition, attention has been given to therole of the principal in providingeffective leadership to empower teachersto assume new roles. The SEA hasdeveloped a series of "For PrincipalsOnly" seminars and workshops to helpprincipals develop new content andleadership skills that reinforce andsupport teachers' efforts to reformpractice.

The Commonwealth Institute forTeachers (CIT) was established in 1984to promote educational excellence amongteachers. The Reform Act of 1990reinforced the premise of the CIT, and itcontinues to provide quality learningexperiences for teachers. Its currentformat supports approximately 100 teach-ers each year in a summer week-longinstitute, which is augmented by twoweekends of follow-up during the schoolyear.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The National Science Foun-dation (NSF) awarded Kentucky a $9.7-

million Statewide Systemic Initiative(SSI) grant to help teachers improve theirskills in teaching science, mathematics,and technology. Kentucky's SSI, calledPRISM, is coordinated by the KentuckyScience and Technology Council inLexington. Working in conjunction withother NSF-funded projects, PRISM hastrained math, science, and technologyspecialists who serve as professionaldevelopment resources in their schoolsand districts. PRISM is currently de-livering a significant amount of profes-sional development to Kentucky's teach-ers and is creating regional networks inconjunction with the RSCs.

Kentucky used its first-year Goals2000 funds to support professionaldevelopment initiatives. In year two,funding was used to support integratedsystemic reform that incorporates tech-nology, parental involvement, and com-munications strategies and links profes-sional development to student achieve-ment. Projects initiated in year one,including a professional developmentproject in Franklin County that trainsteachers to recruit parents as classroomvolunteers, continue to receive support.

Another popular initiative partiallyunderwritten by foundation funds andalso eligible for funding under Kentucky'sGoals 2000 is the Kentucky Collaborativefor Elementary Learning. Through thiscollaborative, over 3,000 teachers havebeen trained in Different Ways ofKnowing (DWoK), a program developedby the Galef Institute. DWoK is a three-year teacher professional developmentprogram in support of an interdiscipli-nary curriculum that was designed forgrades K-6 but is being extended togrades 7-8. Approximately 300 Kentuckyschools are using DWoK to somedegree. In addition, the University ofLouisville, Eastern Kentucky University,and Murray State University are usingDWoK in their elementary teacherpreparation programs.


State Funds. The 1996-97 fundingfor professional development is $14.5millionor, $23 per ADA to the districtsand approximately $2 per ADA to the

;u

SEAfor statewide initiatives. Thisdramatic increase from $1 per ADA in1990-91 occurred over several stages.RSCs are also state-funded, and their1996-97 allocation totaled $2.15 million.CIT activities are funded by an annualstate appropriation of $125,000.

Federal Funds. Kentucky receivesfunds from several federal sources thatare either specifically targeted for, or areavailable to support, professional devel-opment. Funding sources includeSchool-to-Work, IDEA, Title I, and TitleH Eisenhower programs. Title IIEisenhower funds target professionaldevelopment, particularly in mathemat-ics and science, and support numerouslocal district and special state-levelinitiatives for training. In 1994-95, Title IIprovided $2.9 million to Kentucky; in1995-96 it provided $3.3 million and, in1996-97, $3.6 million. Kentucky receivedGoals 2000 funds totaling $1.4 million in1994-95, $5.7 million in 1995-96, and $5.5million in 1996-97. The Goals 2000program includes professional develop-ment as a primary component ofcompetitive funding, and subgrants aremade available to local districts tosupport these efforts.

Local Funds. Some local districtsprovide additional support for profes-sional development. One local initiativethat preceded current education reformefforts is the Jefferson County PublicSchools (JCPS)/Gheens Academy inLouisville, which was created to increaselocal capacity for change. JCPS,Kentucky's largest school district, rec-ognized the advantage of "unlocking"the knowledge and expertise of theteachers and staff in its over 100 schoolsand of creating a network of learners.


Kentucky's legislature has appro-priated funds specifically for profes-sional development, with the clearintention that decisions regarding pro-fessional development be made at theschool level. Sixty-five percent of themoney generated by a school's ADA isdesignated for use by the school

council. By regulation, no more than 15percent of a district's professionaldevelopment funds can be used foradministrative purposes.

Each school and district mustestablish a professional developmentcommittee which is responsible fordeveloping and overseeing the imple-mentation of locally-sponsored profes-sional development (teacher participa-tion is required on these committees).Through its RSCs and a peer reviewprocess, the state assures that allschools have engaged in active planningfor professional development and thatprofessional development plans meetthe following six standards: (1) there is aclear statement of the school or districtmission; (2) all persons affected by theprofessional development plan havebeen represented; (3) a needs assess-ment analysis has been conducted; (4)the focus of professional developmentobjectives is on the school or districtmission and on issues derived from theneeds assessment; (5) the design of theprofessional development program andimplementation strategies supportsschool or district goals and objectives;and (6) there is a process for evaluatingand improving professional develop-ment experiences. Data on the types ofactivities in which schools are engaged,as well as evaluation data, are collected.

The state requires that four days beset aside for teacher professional devel-opment and that each teacher receive atleast 24 hours of training annually.However, there is flexibility in how thisrequirement is met. Teachers mayparticipate in school or district profes-sional development during the schoolyear, or they may satisfy the requirementon their own time, through summercoursework, for example.

Over the past four years, KERA hasallowed five additional, optional days forprofessional development to be takenfrom instructional time. This policy wasnot extended beyond 1995-96, primarilydue to concerns over the loss of teacherinstructional time in the classroom. Boththe Kentucky Education Association(KEA) and the Prichard Committee, acitizens group working in support of

improved educational opportunities, sup-port legislative packages that includemore paid professional developmentdays for teachers. They recommend fiveand ten days, respectively.


Few districts in Kentucky engage incollective bargaining. In those that do,some contracts include professionaldevelopment time and/or stipends, aswell as tuition reimbursement packages.Reimbursement for professional devel-opment expensesfor example, confer-ence registration, travel, and materialsis a fairly standard practice. Stipends forsummer training or weekend activitiesvary by district. Teacher salary incre-ments are accrued through the statecertification ranking system and arebased on graduate credits and degreesearned.


The KEA has taken a lead role inproviding peer teaching and coaching.With financial assistance from thePrichard Committee, the KEA has estab-lished a network of teacher trainers,mentors, and coaches, called T2 (Teach-ers Helping Teachers). Approximately500 teachers are available to provide"peer assistance" on demand; during the1995-96 school year, formal requestsnumbered over 200. It is believed that asignificant amount of informal network-ing occurred as well.

The University of Louisville hasrecently initiated ten professional devel-opment schools. Students in theirteacher preparation programs will spendtime at these sites observing outstand-ing practice, developing teaching skillswith support from school and universityfaculty, and engaging in action researchprojects. In addition, a K-12 laboratoryschool is operating at Eastern KentuckyUniversity.

6


Tom PetersonDirectorDivision of Professional DevelopmentKentucky Department of Education500 Mero StreetFrankfort, KY 40601502-564-2672

Betty LindseyAssociate CommissionerOffice of Teacher CertificationKentucky Department of Education500 Mero StreetFrankfort, KY 40601502 -573- 4606,x250

Linda HarganExecutive DirectorKentucky Collaborative for ElementaryLearning1930 Bishop Lane, Suite 403Louisville, KY 40218502-451-3131


for 1993.





4. .

LouisianaEducation Policy Context

Louisiana has a K-12 publiceducation system that consists of66 local school districts and that

enrolls approximately 775,000 students.Attempts are currently underway tochange the state's public educationsystem from a state-regulated, top-downstructure to a local control model. Thegoal is to loosen regulations on systeminputs in favor of more local accountabil-ity for outputs (i.e., student perfor-mance). In addition to this proposedperformance-based system, Louisiana isrevising other education policies. InJune of 1995, for example, Louisiana'slegislature enacted pilot charter schoolslegislation; two charter schools areexpected to open by the fall of 1996, andanother three are scheduled to open inthe fall of 1997.

In 1986, the state won a land grantsettlement case against the federalgovernment and used the proceeds tocreate the Louisiana Education QualitySupport Fund 8(g) for Elementary andSecondary Education. Despite theseresources, the average salaries ofLouisiana's teachers, determined by astate salary schedule, remain among thelowest in the nation. Current GovernorMike Foster has made a commitment toincrease teacher salaries to match thesouthern regional average by the year2000. Per-pupil expenditure, estimated at$4,160 in 1992-93, also ranks below the



national average.However, a schoolfinance lawsuit has prompted the state'sBoard of Elementary and SecondaryEducation (BESE) to adopt a newminimum funding formula.

The Louisiana Education Assess-ment Program (LEAP) is a statewidemandated testing program. In May of1995, the BESE approved a five-year planto develop statewide content standards.The Louisiana Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) is overseeingthe development of standards for math-ematics, science, English/language arts,social studies, the arts, and foreignlanguages. The new content standardswill reflect higher-order thinking skills, asendorsed by the National Council ofTeachers of Mathematics (NCTM) andother national subject-matter groups.LEAP will be revised to align with thenew, more rigorous standards.

With the support of Goals 2000funding, the Louisiana EducationAchievement and Results Now (LEARN)for the 21st Century initiative is develop-ing a comprehensive plan for schoolimprovement. In the fall of 1994, Goals2000 task force groups were formed andworked for 18 months to developrecommendations in seven programareas, including professional develop-ment. A 23-member LEARN commission,created in March of 1996, is reviewingthese recommendations and devising astate plan that will include timelines for

the development and implementation ofnew standards, assessments, and theschool-based accountability system.


In the summer of 1995, the Profes-sional Development Coordination Teamcomposed of staff from 12 SEA depart-ments was established to design asystemic plan for state-sponsored pro-fessional development. The Teamcomposed the following mission state-ment and working definition of profes-sional development:

"The mission of professional devel-opment is to prepare and supporteducators to help all studentsachieve high standards of learningand development."

"Professional development is acontinuous process to advanceknowledge, skills, and behaviorsfor individuals and groups withinthe learning organization. Profes-sional development includes high-quality ongoing training programswith intensive follow-up and sup-port, study groups, action researchand peer coaching."

Incorporating standards from theNational Staff Development Council andthe U.S. Department of Education's

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

63

Professional Development Team, theSEA has endorsed the following prin-ciples, which state that professionaldevelopment should:

focus on teachers as central toschool reform, yet include all mem-bers of the school community;

respect and nurture the intellectualcapacity of teachers and others inthe community;

reflect the best available researchand practice in teaching, learning,and leadership;

be planned principally by those whowill participate in such develop-ment;

enable teachers to develop expertisein content, pedagogy, and otheressential elements in teaching tohigh standards;

require ample time and other re-sources that enable educators todevelop their individual capacity tolearn and work together;

promote commitment to continuousinquiry and improvement embeddedin the daily life of schools;

be driven by a coherent long-termplan that incorporates professionaldevelopment as essential among abroad set of strategies to improvedteaching and learning; and

be evaluated on the basis of itsimpact on teacher effectiveness,student learning, leadership, andthe school community and use theassessment to guide subsequentprofessional development efforts.

Teacher Certification Policies.Beginning teachers receive a Type C(regular) Certificate. As a result of statelegislation passed in June of 1994, full-time teachers hired by Louisiana's publicschools are now required to participatein the Louisiana Teacher AssessmentProgram during their first year ofemployment. For new teachers who are

2

employed without a regular certificate,its issuance is conditional on thesuccessful completion of the TeacherAssessment Program.

The Louisiana Components of Ef-fective Teaching, adopted in February of1992, describe effective teaching be-haviors for beginning and experiencedteachers. The components serve asevaluation criteria for the LouisianaTeacher Assessment Program and forlocal teacher evaluations. They focus onfour domains of teaching: planning,management, instruction, and profes-sional development.

The Louisiana Teacher AssessmentProgram is used during the first semesterof a teacher's employment to providesupport and strategies for professionaldevelopment. During the second semes-ter, the assessment is used to collectdata that will be used by the teacher'sassessors to recommend either perma-nent certification or continuation for asecond year in the assessment program.Beginning teachers are assigned a three-member support team that is responsiblefor conducting the assessment. Supportteam members, who are state-trained,consist of the new teacher's immediatesupervisor (usually the school principalor an assistant principal), a peer-nominated and experienced teacher inthe new teacher's school, and an external(i.e., central office, retired educator, orcollege faculty) assessor. Each assessorconducts a minimum of one visit to a newteacher's classroom during each semes-ter of the assessment year. During thefirst semester, or the support semester,new teachers attend a state-designedassessment orientation and participatein professional development activities.At the conclusion of each semester, ajointly designed professional develop-ment plan is created for the new teacher,who is then responsible for its implemen-tation. Teachers have up to two years tosuccessfully complete the assessmentprogram.

After successful completion of theassessment and three years of experi-ence, teachers receive a Type B (perma-nent) Certificate. Louisiana does nothave recertification requirements; how-ever, Type B teachers must participate ina local evaluation at least every three

84

years and implement a professionalgrowth plan based on evaluation find-ings.

State-Supported Programs. Moststatewide, non-categorical professionaldevelopment is coordinated through theeight state-funded Regional ServiceCenters (RSCs). The RSCs coordinateassessor training and new teacherorientation for the Teacher AssessmentProgram.

The Professional Development Co-ordination Team developed and distrib-uted a 1995-96 catalogue of SEA-sponsored professional development.Catalogue listings are structured undersix headings: (1) SEA-conducted volun-tary in-service activities; (2) RSC-conducted voluntary in-service activi-ties; (3) mandated professional develop-ment; (4) state and national conferences;(5) on-site monitoring activities; and (6)professional development services avail-able upon request. Each listing providesthe in-service program name, activitydescription, contact person and phonenumber, location, target audience, andprogram length. The coordination teamdistributed a survey to parish adminis-trators to solicit feedback on theusefulness of the catalogue, which SEAplans to publish annually. In addition,the team plans to conduct a series ofregional focus groups with teachers,administrators, and parents to hear theirviews on professional developmentneeds.

Through its Bureau of EffectiveSchools, the SEA is working to establisha state chapter of the National StaffDevelopment Council. Over 100 educa-tors from across the state attended thefirst Louisiana Staff Development Coun-cil (LSDC) meeting, held on February 22,1996. The SEA focused its July, 1996,Title I Conference on staff development.The LSDC hopes to be officiallyapproved as a state affiliate by Decemberof 1996.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Louisiana's Goals 2000 sub-grant program targets three reform areas:school improvement, professional devel-opment, and preservice. Awarded on acompetitive basis, the subgrants providefiscal and other support to parishes,local consortia, colleges and universi-

I

ties, and non-profit organizations. Goals2000 professional development subgrants"enable schools/parishes to workcollaboratively to design and implementplans that provide continuing, sustainedprofessional development for educatorsand related services personnel that willlead to long-range systemic reform andresult in improved student learning."Grant recipients receive up to $20,000 forplanning and $60,000 for implementation.In 1994-95, 31 school systems (47percent of all parishes) received fundingfor professional development planningand implementation. During the 1995-96school year, four professional develop-ment planning and eight implementationsubgrants were awarded to 12 localparishes.

The Louisiana Systemic InitiativesProgram (LaSIP) was initiated in 1991through a five-year, Statewide SystemicInitiative (SSI) grant from the NationalScience Foundation, with additionalfunding from the BESE and Board ofRegents (BOR). LaSIP has promotedstandards-based curriculum reform inGrades 4-8 in mathematics and science.Approximately 70 percent of LaSIP's$20-million budget has been used toimplement a professional developmentmodel that consists of intensive andcontent-rich summer work, academic-year follow-up, and an on-site school/university professional development co-ordinator. Teachers receive a $60-per-day stipend to attend summer work-shops and $300 to purchase instruc-tional materials during the school year.All 66 Louisiana parishes are involvedin this initiative, and over 4,000 teachershave each received 150 to 200 contacthours of training and technical assis-tance through LaSIP's professionaldevelopment projects.


State Funds. Since 1992, the state-supported Innovative Professional De-velopment Program has made fundsavailable for local professional develop-ment. For 1996-97, the BESE allocated$1.7 million in 8(g) funds for thisinitiative. The state also allocates $2.1

million per year for the Teacher TuitionExemption Program (see "Teacher Com-pensation"). The state-funded TeachersAssessment Program costs totaled $5.4million in 1995-96.

Federal Funds. Twelve Goals 2000professional development subgrants wereawarded in 1995-96, totaling $503,328.LaSIP activities are funded by a $10-million SSI grant and a matching annualstate 8(g) fund allocation of $500,000, aswell as an additional $500,000 from theBOR. Louisiana received a $5.6-millionEisenhower grant in 1995-96.

Local Funds. Parish-sponsoredprofessional development is fundedthrough local budgets, although costsfor certain activities may be eligible forstate reimbursement (see below).


Each parish is required to implementthe Teacher Assessment Program ac-cording to state guidelines. Localparishes must also conduct annualteacher evaluations based on effectiveteaching competencies and provideopportunities for the implementation ofteachers' professional growth plans.The school accreditation process re-quires teachers to participate in six hoursof professional growth activities everyfive years.

Local systems can apply for stateprofessional development funds throughthe Innovative Professional Develop-ment Program. In order to receive fundsthrough this initiative, parishes arerequired to submit to the BESE anapplication that includes a programdescription and a line-item budget and tocomplete an evaluation process. Suc-cessful applications must show that theprofessional development activity isspecifically designed to improve studentacademic achievement and/or vocationalskills development. Parishes mustinclude school-level personnel in thedevelopment of the application.

Innovative Professional Develop-ment Program funds can be used to payfor credit and non-credit courses orworkshops that focus on the following

themes: innovative curriculum andinstruction, human development andlearning, instructional technology,school improvement, language and lit-eracy, school and classroom manage-ment, legal and ethical issues, andcultural diversity. Non-credit trainingexpenses may not exceed an amountequal to $6 per teacher, per hour.Expenses eligible for reimbursementinclude tuition fees, instructor andspeaker fees, participant stipends, sub-stitute pay, operating expenses, andtravel. Colleges and universities, theSEA, and public and non-public schoolsare also eligible to receive funds forprofessional development through thisprogram. Eligible agencies are allowed torequest funding for up to ten projects peryear, not to exceed a total cost of$100,000. The BESE accepts and reviewsapplications monthly. BESE complianceofficers conduct on-site audits of allfunded projects.

The school year calendar consistsof 175 instructional and five discretion-ary days. Most parishes earmark at leasttwo discretionary days for professionaldevelopment.


Advancement on the state salaryschedule is awarded for obtaining amaster's degree, a master's plus 30graduate credits, an Education Specialistdegree, and a doctoral degree.

Started in 1987, the Teacher TuitionExemption Program is an 8(g)-fundedinitiative that pays teachers' collegetuition for up to four courses over twoconsecutive years. In order to takeadvantage of this program, teachersmust submit an approved application;take courses in their certified contentarea, area of job assignment, and/ordesignated critical shortage areas; andreceive a grade of C or better. The tuitionpayment is made directly to participatingcolleges and universities.


The Louisiana Education Associa-tion (LEA) sponsors an annual Instruc-tion and Professional DevelopmentConference held in September. Theconference is structured as a two-day,theme-based teacher training event thatconsists of 15 to 20 workshops. LEAmembers, as well as non-members, mayattend the conference, which attracts anestimated 300 teachers annually. LEA'sannual convention is held over threedays in November. Schools are closedduring the convention, and over 200teachers regularly attend the event.Teachers receive one semester hour ofcredit for every two hours of participa-tion in LEA professional development.These credits may be used towardsfulfillment of school accreditation re-quirements.


Barbara DunbarEducation Executive AdministratorAdministrative Leadership AcademyLouisiana Department of EducationP.O. Box 94064Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9064504-.342-3483

Diane GarboAssistant DirectorBureau of Higher Education andTeacher CertificationLouisiana Department of EducationP.O. Box 94064Baton Rouge, LA 70804-9064504-342-3501

Marie WeissAssistant Bureau DirectorBureau of Professional AccountabilityLouisiana Department of EducationP.O. Box 94064Baton Bouge, LA 70804-9064504-342-1146

Reports and Publications

"Professional Development: What Is It?What Should It Look Like?," Profes-sional Development newsletter; volume1, issue 1; Louisiana Department ofEducation (September 28, 1995).

Professional Development ActivitiesCatalogue: 1995-96; Louisiana Depart-ment of Education, Office of AcademicPrograms.

Louisiana Components of EffectiveTeaching; position paper of Panel 1; TheLouisiana State Board of Elementary andSecondary Education (September 1992).

Strategies for Effective Teaching: AProfessional Development ManualLouisiana Teacher Assessment Program1994-95; Office of Research and Devel-opment, Bureau of Professional Ac-countability; Louisiana Department ofEducation.






U6


MaineEducation Policy Context

Maine is largely a rural state witha school-age population of216,995 enrolled in its 285

school systems. Maine's school sys-tems have strong local control overpublic education; most policies thatimpact teacher professional develop-ment are set at the district level.

In 1990, the State Board of Educa-tion (SBE) adopted the Common Core ofLearning (CCL), which presents a non-disciplinary organization of knowledgeand skills and an integrated approach toteaching and learning. The CCL setsstate educational goals in the areas ofpersonal and global stewardship, com-munication, reasoning and problemsolving, and the human record. It wasdeveloped to serve as the basis foreducation reform in Maine. Accordingto a report issued by the MaineDepartment of Education (referred tohereafter as the state education agency,or SEA), approximately 43 percent ofMaine's school systems were involvedin school restructuring, guided by theCCL, in 1992.

In 1993, legislation was passed thatestablished a Learning Results TaskForce. The Task Force was charged withestablishing broad outlines for studentperformance standards and also servesas Maine's Goals 2000 panel. The SBEdeveloped specific recommendationsbased on the Task Force's broadly



outlined standards and presented themto the legislature during the January -March of 1996 session. The legislationwas passed in June of 1996, despitestrong opposition.

The SBE, the SEA, and the Univer-sity of Maine system, along with theMaine Leadership Consortium, havebeen working together to create a

results-based model of initial teachercertification based on the CCL. They areimplementing a three-part strategy todevelop this model. Three partnershipsbetween colleges and local districts werefunded to develop and pilot newstandards and approaches to certifica-tion. Five additional sites are piloting theproposed standards, which are closelyrelated to the National Board forProfessional Teaching Standards andInterstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium (INTASC) guide-lines. Finally, a series of meetingsoutlining their findings was held. Basedon these activities, the state intends toestablish an advisory committee to workon initial certification legislation.


Maine is currently setting standardsfor students and new educators. Profes-sional development is considered to bean integral part of implementing educa-tion reform in Maine, and staff from theGovernor's Office, the SBE, and the

Western Maine Partnership are workingon a state plan for professional develop-ment. In addition, Maine is a partnerstate with the National Commission onTeaching and America's Future and willundergo a teacher development policyaudit, the results of which will be used toinstitute a comprehensive plan forteacher professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. In1988, the state turned the teachercertification process over to local dis-tricts, which are now required by thestate to establish committees thatoversee beginning and continuing edu-cator certification. Local certificationcommittees can determine whether or nota new teacher will be granted aprofessional certificate and can approveor not approve professional develop-ment activities. They may also suggestareas in which continuing educatorsshould improve. In Maine, each localcertification committee is responsible forensuring that all district educators arecertified. In some districts, the certifica-tion committees are elected, and inothers they are appointed by thesuperintendent.

Beginning teachers receive a two-year probationary contract and workwith a professional support team for aminimum of 18 months. The supportteam is responsible for providing guid-ance for new teachers and overseeingthe induction process. In addition, theinclusion of professional development

'his profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Wig Research in Education. The study andesulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituten Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.phis profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


11E61 uur

activities during the induction period isleft to the discretion of the supportteams. These teams help the new teacherdevelop an action plan with a mentor. Ifthe teacher completes the plan after twoyears, the certification committee willrecommend that the he or she receive aprofessional certificate. While the statehas set certain competencies for begin-ning teachers, the local certificationteams determine whether or not a teacheris eligible for a professional certificate.After initial licenses are approved, alleducators in Maine must take a three-credit, state-approved college course onspecial needs children.

Professional certificates are renew-able every five years. To renew aprofessional certificate, a teacher mustdevelop a professional developmentplan, which is approved by the localcertification committee, and they mustcomplete six credit hours or 90 clockhours of professional development ac-tivities during the five-year period.These activities can include workshops,serving on committees, and collegecoursework. Those renewing profes-sional certificates, but not employedunder that certificate, must complete sixcredits of approved study and renewdirectly through the SEA.

Master teacher certificates are avail-able in Maine, although there are only afew teachers in the state who currentlyhold this level of certification. Teacherswho have at least two years of classroomexperience and demonstrate involve-ment in curricular and professionaldevelopment activities are eligible tobecome master teachers. Teachersseeking this credential work with asupport team for a minimum of 18months. The support team assists in thedevelopment and completion of anaction plan. The process is similar to theinitial teacher certification process.

As discussed above, Maine is in theprocess of developing preservice stan-dards for new educators that, when fullyimplemented, may have a broad impacton the state's certification and recertifi-cation system.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA does not have an office dedicatedspecifically to professional developmentprogramming or policy. The Office of

2

Certification and Placement is respon-sible for issuing teaching certificates,although the decision to grant recertifi-cation to educators is made by localcertification committees for teachersalready employed in Maine schools. Thedecision to grant certification for allothers is determined by the Office ofCertification and Placement.

The state hosts workshops onreform-related topics, specifically on theCCL and on standards-based education.Teachers are not required to participatein any state-sponsored workshops. TheSEA hires consultants who providetechnical assistance to schools that arerestructuring based on the CCL andthose that need special educationassistance. Schools working directlywith the SEA to restructure receive agreat deal of technical assistance fromthat agency.

The Maine Leadership Consortiumis trying to raise awareness of theimportance of teacher professional de-velopment in implementing reform. Thegroup represents 20 organizations in-volved in education throughout thestate, which in turn represent over 30,000educators, parents, business representa-tives, and other citizens. The LeadershipConsortium includes state governmentorganizations such as the SEA and theMaine School Management Associa-tion, as well as the University of Mainesystem, the Maine Education Associa-tion, various administrative organiza-tions, and the Maine Chamber ofCommerce and Industry. Its overall goalis to improve working relationships andcommunication within the educationcommunity and to establish a policyagenda for Maine's education system.

The Leadership Consortium issueda report in 1993 that outlined five majorpolicy areas for reform: learning results,accountability, opportunity to learn,goals-based professional developmentfor educators, and equitable statefunding. The Leadership Consortiumadvocates reforming the existing systemand has recommended that the state"take leadership and provide policiesand funding to ensure that systemic,state-wide goals-based professional de-velopment is a central feature ofcontinuing school improvement." To

0 0o

date, however, no state action has beentaken to provide increased funding forteacher professional development.

The Leadership Consortium helps tomaintain a teacher professional develop-ment calendar, which is accessible overthe Internet, through a joint project withthe Information Exchange at the MaineState Library. The group also hasconvened providers of teacher profes-sional development to discuss statewideprofessional development needs and tohelp coordinate the provision of pro-grams across the state.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The state is participating inthe federally sponsored Goals 2000initiative, which supports educationreform efforts in Maine, particularly inthe area of teacher professional develop-ment. Professional development plansmust be included in the school improve-ment plans required by the Goals 2000grants process.

The National Science Foundation(NSF) awarded Maine a grant to reformmath and science education. TheStatewide Systemic Initiative (SSI) grantis administered by the Maine Math andScience Alliance, a non-profit organiza-tion created by the state in 1992 for thispurpose. Its advisory board includesmembers of state government, thebusiness community, the Maine MathTeachers Association, and the MaineScience Teachers Association, as well asother representatives. Its mission is thesystemic improvement of math andscience education from pre-kindergartenthrough graduate school. One of theAlliance's components is a ProfessionalPreparation and Development Commit-tee that is responsible for year-long staffdevelopment institutes and the develop-ment of a Beacon College to ensureeducators have access to "world-class"math and science teacher education.The Maine SSI also supports demonstra-tion schools, which offer professionaldevelopment in their region and sponsorsummer institutes.


State Funds. There are no statefunds set aside in the education budget

specifically for professional develop-ment activities. Maine allocated be-tween $8,000 and $15,000 to each of thepilot districts testing new certificationrequirements. The first three sites werefunded for three years; however, newsites may only be funded for one year.

Federal Funds. Goals 2000 funds areused to support professional develop-ment in districts, local school improve-ment efforts, and teacher-prepared ac-tivities. In FY 1996, Maine received $1.3million from Goals 2000. The state alsoreceived Eisenhower funds that supportprofessional development in mathemat-ics and science.

Local Funds. Local districts are notrequired to spend a minimum percentageof their budgets on teacher professionaldevelopment activities. However, theydo support professional developmentthrough their general state allocation. Ifa school district spends money onprofessional development, they arereimbursed by the state on a slidingscale. Over the past five years, schooldistricts in Maine have reportedly lostover $500,000 in state funding, and only25 percent of this figure was regainedthrough increases in local propertytaxes. This financial crunch has ser-iously weakened the ability of districtsthat are more dependent on state aid toprovide professional development fortheir teachers.


Districts are required to establishcertification committees that overseeprofessional development plans forindividual educators. Under Goals 2000,districts must develop districtwide staffdevelopment plans as part of theirschool improvement plans. The stateallows districts to release students forfive days for various activities, althoughthe time does not have to be used forprofessional development. There is nominimum number of days required forprofessional development activities.Many districts have a 175-day instruc-tional year with five free days forprofessional development or other ac-tivities.

The process of choosing topics forin-service days and staff developmentproviders varies greatly from district todistrict. In some districts, teacher inputis solicited, while in others the centraloffice may select topics and providerswithout school-level input.


Maine's teachers can and do bar-gain for professional development on adistrict-by-district basis. The amountand type of professional developmentnegotiated varies greatly by district.

Local districts reimburse teachersfor college courses; however the amountof reimbursement varies by district.Teachers are also given salary incre-ments or step increases for experienceand degrees earned.


The Maine Education Associationprovides teacher professional develop-ment for its members and participates instate-level stakeholders meetings re-garding state reform.

Universities are a major provider ofteacher professional development ser-vices through college courses. Universi-ties are also helping to shape policy atthe state level and organizing regionalnetworks of school districts in order toprovide professional development. TheUniversity of Maine system stands outas a key player in this regard. Asmentioned earlier, the University ofMaine system is very involved witheducation policy in the state, particularlyin the standards-setting area.

The University of Maine systemalso provides professional developmentfor teachers through four regionalpartnerships with districts: the SouthernMaine Partnership (at the University ofSouthern Maine), the Western MainePartnership (at University of Maine,Farmington), the Washington CountyPartnership, and the Penquis Partnership(a research partnership involving theUniversity of Maine that includes 24

&9

local school districts). Each partnershipoffers a range of professional develop-ment opportunities. Some providespecific workshops that bring in outsideexperts. Others, like the Western Mainepartnership, offer professional develop-ment using "reflective practice groups"hosted by a facilitator. The statesupports these partnerships with federalgrant money and special educationfunds. Another partnership effort, theMaine Principals Association ResearchPartnership, is a collaboration of Univer-sity of Maine research faculty andprincipals in local schools that isundertaking a great deal of "action"research.

The Southern Maine Partnership is aschool-university collaboration repre-senting 27 public school districts, threeprivate schools, the Maine College ofArt, the Southern Maine TechnicalCollege, and the University of SouthernMaine. The Partnership has built areputation as an organization thatrespects the professional knowledge ofeducators and nurtures teachers' poten-tial as inventors and change agents. Itprovides a forum where ideas areexchanged, where university and publicschool faculty inform and enrich oneanother's practice, and where educa-tional research is examined through thelens of daily school experience. ThePartnership sponsors different projectsin member schools and districts. Theseinclude: Assessment Mini-Grants, theDemonstration Schools Project, andSchool Quality Review. It is also affil-iated with the Coalition of EssentialSchools, the Foxfire National OutreachNetwork, the National Center for Re-structuring Education, Schools, and Te-aching (NCREST), and the NationalEducation Association's Center for Inn-ovation. The Partnership has achievedregional, statewide, and national reputa-tion as a center for school-based,educator-driven school reform. Partner-ship activities are supported throughannual dues, in-kind contributions fromthe University of Southern Maine, andoutside grants and gifts from privatefoundations.

The Professional Development Cen-ter (PDC) is a staff development agentand resource for the College of Educa-

tion and Human Development (CEHD) ofthe University of Southern Maine (USM)and for the education community atlarge. The PDC works collaborativelywith the Southern Maine Partnership, K-12 schools, human resources organiza-tions, the SEA, and professional asso-ciations. The PDC develops, imple-ments, and administers credit and non-credit courses, workshops, and insti-tutes at USM and community locationsto supplement and expand professionaldevelopment. During the school year,the PDC conducts technical assistanceand training programs designed to meetthe specific needs of individual Maineschool districts. These programs mayoffer recertification credits (continuingeducation units) or in-service academiccredit. Past course offerings haveincluded writing workshops, curriculumunit design, and instruction of language-learning-disabled and special needsstudents. During the summer, the PDCsponsors special courses and institutesfor educators throughout Maine: Oneprogram is Math Solutions, a week-longcourse for K-12 teachers taught byfaculty from across the nation. Dimen-sions of Learning is another programadministered by the PDC. It provides acomprehensive K-12 instructional frame-work that teachers use to improve theway they plan instruction, designcurriculum, and assess student perfor-mance.

Another well-known USM programis the Extended Teacher EducationProgram (ETEP). ETEP serves 60 to 90teachers each year, providing courses inpedagogy and student teaching experi-ences to new professionals who havecompleted required academic work, butare in need of further professionaltraining. ETEP is a college-basedprogram, and students apply and paytuition. With the addition of six credits,the ETEP program can lead to a master'sdegree.

Known throughout Maine as "theCenter," the Center for EducationalServices is a private organization thatprovides support for school improve-ment activities, including professional

development, to public and privateschools. It also works closely with thestate on certain initiatives. The Center islocated in Auburn and has been inexistence since 1975.


Nancy IbarguenDirector of Certification and PlacementMaine Department of Education23 Statehouse StationAugusta, ME 04333207-287-4461

Nancy HenselVice President for Academic AffairsUniversity of Maine at Farmington86 Main StreetFarmington, ME 04938207-778-7279

Tim HumphreyDirectorMaine Education Association35 Community DriveAugusta, ME 04330207 - 622- 5866, ext. 320


for 1993.





DO


MarylandEducation Policy Context

Maryland ranks 42nd in size and19th in population among the50 states, and approximately

82 percent of the state's five millionresidents live in the Baltimore-Washing-ton corridor. There are 24 schooldistricts in the state-23 county systemsand the Baltimore City districtservingnearly 800,000 students.

Maryland has undergone a series ofsteps in its education reform efforts,beginning in 1989 with the report of theGovernor's Commission on School Per-formance. The State Board of Education(SBE) then developed "Schools forSuccess," a comprehensive statewideschool improvement strategy alignedwith the national education goals. Thelinchpin of this plan is the MarylandSchool Performance Program (MSPP), anaccountability system that "assessesschool performance, measures schoolprogress toward state standards, [and]intervenes, ultimately, in schools that failto improve." The reform agenda inMaryland is guided by three basicprinciples: (1) all children can learn; (2)all children have the right to attendschools in which they can progress andlearn; and (3) all children will have a realopportunity to learn equally rigorouscontent.

The development of the Schools forSuccess/Goals 2000 State Plan wasguided by a broad-based, 54-member



panel. The 86-page Goals 2000 report(augmented by a 20-page technologyreport) released in May of 1995 hasserved as the basis for continuedplanning and development. One of thepanel's subcommitteesTeacher Train-ing, Certification, and Staff Develop-mentaddressed the issue of teacherprofessional development in generaland, specifically, its role within thecontext of the Schools for Successreform plan. Teacher professionaldevelopment is seen as one of thecornerstones of the Schools for Successprogram.

Since 1989, four major statewideinitiatives that support the MSPP havebeen launched. First, content andperformance standards for schools,school systems, and the state wereestablished, and content standards inreading, writing, language usage, math-ematics, science, and social studies weredefined for students in grades 3, 5, and 8.State curriculum frameworks were devel-oped, providing guidelines for theschools and districts. Second, the Mary-land School Performance AssessmentProgram (MSPAP), a series of state-developed criterion-referenced tests, ad-ministered to students in grades 3, 5, and8, was initiated to measure schools'progress. Third, in 1994, Marylandbegan the process of developing a highschool assessment system to comple-ment the MSPAP assessment tests.Once developed, the high school as-

sessments will be used to determinestudent achievement, with the compila-tion of student scores complementingthe MSPAP information about a school'sprogress. Finally, each school, eachsystem, and the state issue annual"report cards" to communicate with thepublic. The report cards contain demo-graphic information, assessment results,and other data, such as attendance anddropout rates, as well as high schoolcompletion information. The MSPPrequires every school to establish aschool improvement team, which devel-ops and implements a school improve-ment plan.


The success of the MSPP clearlyhinges on the extent to which Maryland'sschools are able to improve theirinstructional programs. State officialsrecognize the challenges this presents toteacher candidates as well as practicingteachers. In 1991, a task force wascreated to recommend a comprehensiveplan for educating teachers, both in thepreparation stage and as practitioners.The task force's work focused onteacher preparation. A second task forcewas created to determine the specifics ofimplementing the teacher preparationrecommendations and to address thecontinuing professional development ofteachers.

this profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andesulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National InstituteIn Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.Phis profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


91

Recently, the SBE requested that astrategic plan for staff development bewritten. A 30-plus member StaffDevelopment Task Force was estab-lished and co-chaired by leaders from theMaryland Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) and theMaryland Business Roundtable. TheTask Force created a vision for staffdevelopment in Maryland, "SupportingSchools for Success," which states:

"Staff development enables allthose involved in educating Mary-land students to be active partnersin a learning community. Thislearning community sets the stan-dard for best staff developmentpractices by forming a bridgebetween educational goals andstudent achievement."

The vision addresses leadership,resources, support systems, strategicalliance partners, best practices, educa-tional goals, and student achievement.The work of the Task Force was recentlycompleted, and three recommendationswere made to the SBE. They asked theSBE to:

1. implement effective professional de-velopment practices linked to im-proved student performance acrossMaryland;

2. examine and realign existing supportsystemstime, money, technology,staffing, performance feedback, andaccountabilityto create a culturethat encourages and sustains effec-tive professional development; and,

3. provide visible leadership and advo-cacy for professional development.

In addition, Maryland is a partnerstate with the National Commission onTeaching and America's Future and willundergo a teacher development policyaudit, the results of which will be used toinstitute a comprehensive plan forteacher professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheProfessional Standards and TeacherEducation Board (PSTEB) is appointed

2

by the governor and has the authority toenact requirements regarding teacherlicensure (although the SBE has 60 daysto override the PSTEB's decisions).Prior to January of 1995, recertificationwas automatic for any teacher holding anadvanced professional certificate. Newrequirements for licensure establishedfive types of certification (see below).In addition, the Teacher Education TaskForce issued its report entitled, "Rede-sign of Teacher Education in Maryland:Report of the Teacher Education TaskForce" in June of 1994. Reportrecommendations include using theInterstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium (INTASC) stan-dards and the "Essential Dimensions ofTeaching" standards developed bycommittees of Maryland educators torevise existing requirements for teacherpreparation programs and candidateassessment.

Maryland's current system of teacherlicensure includes the following certifi-cates:

The Professional Eligibility Certifi-cate, valid for five years, is grantedto candidates who have completedan approved program and teachercertification testing requirements. Itcan be renewed after completing sixsemester hours or by entering theprofessional certificate sequenceupon being hired.

The Standard Professional I Certifi-cate is valid for three years and isbased on the same requirements asthe Professional Eligibility Certifi-cate, but the individual must beemployed in a Maryland school.The certificate is renewable onlyonce, if the applicant completes sixsemester hours but is unable to meetthe experience requirement for theStandard Professional II Certificate.

The Standard Professional II Certifi-cate is valid for seven years,requires a completed Standard Pro-fessional I Certificate, three years ofsatisfactory professional school-related experience (two of which areconsecutive), six semester hours,and participation in a professional

development plan for the AdvancedProfessional Certificate.

An Extended Standard ProfessionalII Certificate is valid for three yearsand is granted to those individualswith a Standard Professional HCertificate who complete six semes-ter hours but whose service wasinterrupted during the validity pe-riod.

The Advanced Professional Certifi-cate is valid for five years and isgranted to individuals eligible forthe Standard Professional Certifi-cate if they have a master's degreeor 36 semester hours of post-baccalaureate work and four yearsof satisfactory school-related expe-rience (two of which are consecu-tive) within seven years precedingthe date of Advanced ProfessionalCertificate issuance. Renewal re-quirements include a professionaldevelopment plan for the nextAdvanced Professional Certificate,consisting of six semester hours ortheir equivalent through other pro-fessional activities (e.g., pursuit ofNational Board Certification, cur-riculum development, and researchactivities) as determined by the localschool board.

Maryland also offers ProvisionalCertificates, which allow districts thatcannot find a qualified, credentialedteacher in a given subject or specialtyarea to hire an individual with abachelor's degree who agrees to worktoward a regular credential. Theindividual may renew the ProvisionalCertificate as long as six semester hoursare completed each year, until require-ments for the Standard ProfessionalCertification are met. The ResidentTeacher Certificate Program is open toan individual with a bachelor's degree, a"B" average in the major, passing scoreson the National Teacher Exam, and acontract with an employing district for aK-12 teaching position. Candidates take90 hours of designated professionaleducation courses and teach withsupport from a supervising teacher/mentor.

State-Supported Programs.Maryland's SEA provides School Im-provement Leadership Training andtechnical assistance to school improve-ment teams and site administrators inlow-achieving schools. The trainingemphasizes interpreting data, using it tomake instructional decisions, and work-ing more effectively in teams. The SEA isalso establishing and training TechnicalAssistance Support Teams (TASTs) ineach local school system. Trainingincludes topics such as how to interpretdata and use it in a school improvementplan, as well as how to help groups workmore effectively in teams. Training isalso available to School ImprovementTeams (SITs) on the same topics.Twenty-nine schools have been identi-fied as Challenge Schools, which confersadditional state dollars that are targetedto assist with school improvementefforts. A portion of these fundssupports training for SITs and trainingfor state assistance teams, which arecomprised of members of the businesscommunity, the SEA, and local schoolsystems.

Four state-funded Regional StaffDevelopment Centers (RSDCs) helpschool staff and administration imple-ment school-based decision making.These centers serve nine school sys-tems on the Eastern Shore, the Baltimoreand Prince George's County metropoli-tan areas, and the four school systems inWestern Maryland. The three primaryareas of focus are SIT development,promising practices, and parent/commu-nity involvement. The state plans toexpand RSDCs and to shift their focus tostaff development for high schoolassessment.

Since 1989, approximately 800 teach-ers have been trained in advanced mathand science content and methodology atthe Governor's Academy for Mathemat-ics, Science, and Technology. TheAcademy offers an intensive four-weeksummer program, after which teachersreturn to their home schools as ambassa-dors who motivate and instruct otherteachers, as well as their own students.Issues of equity for traditionally under-represented minority and female stu-dents are addressed in this program.

Federal- or Foundation - SupportedPrograms. The Schools for Success/Goals 2000 process included subgrantsto local school systems and consortia oflocal school systems. Each proposalwas required to include professionaldevelopment activities for teachers,principals, and other educators, and/oractivities to improve preservice teachereducation and school administrationprograms. Subgrants awarded in 1995-96reflected 60 percent of the moneyreceived by Maryland. In 1996-97, 12school systems received individualsubgrants, and a consortium of all 24school systems received funding. Goals2000 funds also supported assessmentdesign and scoring, as well as curriculumdevelopment activities that involvedmore than 3,000 teachers. In AnneArundel County, Prince George's County,and Baltimore City, funds supported apartnership with community collegesand universities to provide targetedprofessional development for districtteachers.

The Carnegie Corporation has pro-vided funding to ten low-performingmiddle schools to assist with reforms inschool organization, management, cur-riculum, classroom practices, teachereducation, and links with resourcesoutside the school. This initiative, theCarnegie Middle Schools Project, pro-vides resources and assistance to helpmeet the needs of the students, bothwithin the school and in the largercommunity.

Baltimore City Public Schools re-ceived an Urban System Initiative (USI)grant from the National Science Founda-tion (NSF) which provides substantialfunds for professional development inmathematics and science instruction.


State Funds. Maryland currentlybudgets $600,000 to support the RSDCs.Districts do not receive a state-fundedallocation specifically for professionaldevelopment.

Federal Funds. Maryland receiveda Goals 2000 grant of $1,448,309 in 1994,$5,379,938 in 1995, and $5,054,796 in

93

1996. Additionally, in 1995, Marylandwas one of eight states to receive Goals2000 leadership money for assessmentdevelopment, a grant totaling $224,000.Maryland also received $3,122,827 inEisenhower funds for professional de-velopment in 1995.

Local Funds. Local allocations forprofessional development are deter-mined at the district level.


Since 1995, the state has mandatedthat every certificated educator musthave a written professional developmentplan agreed upon by the employingdistrict and the individual. The plansmay be linked with teacher classroomperformance; however, this aspect of theplan is optional. Professional develop-ment is required for licensure renewal forall certificated employees, and newguidelines redefine professional devel-opment to include a wide variety ofactivities. Teachers can serve asmentors to newer teachers, superviseaction research, participate in localschool system projects, attend profes-sional conferences, and participate ineducational travel.


Local school boards determine thecompensation for their staff, most oftenthrough collective bargaining agree-ments. Generally, districts offer a varietyof "salary lanes" through which teacherscan advance their salary levels byobtaining post-baccalaureate credits andgraduate degrees.1., -

Reimbursement forcollege tuition and other professionaldevelopment activities are provided atthe discretion of the district.


The Maryland Higher EducationCommission, in collaboration with the

SEA, is providing the impetus for a newmodel of preservice education andcontinuing professional development.Regional Professional DevelopmentSchools (PDSs), operated by consortiaof local school districts and universities,will provide the continuum of serviceand support for both beginning andveteran teachers.

The Center for Technology inEducation is a joint project of the SEAand Johns Hopkins University. Thepurpose of the project is to providetechnical support to educators to aid thegrowth and development of studentswith disabilities, as well as to helpfamilies of children with disabilities. TheCenter also supports the management ofsystemic change for school improve-ment through technology.

The Prince George's County PublicSchools and the University of Marylandat College Park have formed a partner-ship to improve the quality of teachingand learning in classrooms by integrat-ing the design principles of the ATLASprogram, with an emphasis on theteaching and learning of students forwhom English is a second language.

The Maryland Business Roundtablefor Education, comprised of 63 ofMaryland's largest employers, has madea ten-year commitment to supporteducation reform initiatives. TheRoundtable is involved in a number ofprojects and activities, among them,providing training and professionaldevelopment to schools and schooldistricts to strengthen the knowledgeand skills needed to improve studentachievement. In addition, the Roundtableis co-chairing the work of the StaffDevelopment Task Force, offering exper-tise and resources.


Gaye BrownChief of Staff Development BranchMaryland State Department ofEducation200W. Baltimore StreetBaltimore, MD 21201410-767-0381

Richard SteinkeDeputy State SuperintendentSchool Improvement ServicesMaryland State Department ofEducation200 W. Baltimore StreetBaltimore, MD 21201410-767-0229

Janet MarshChiefCertification BranchMaryland State Department ofEducation200 W. Baltimore StreetBaltimore, MD 21201410-767-0406






cpRE


Massachusetts


Massachusetts enrolls more than900,000 students in its 331school districts. A strong

sense of local control in the state'sschool systems has, at times, madeexercising state-level leadership in edu-cation a difficult challenge. However,the state's role in shaping local practiceand policy increased when the Educa-tion Reform Act of 1993 became law. InJune of 1993, the Massachusetts Su-preme Court found the state's school-financing system to be inequitable andordered it replaced. The EducationReform Act of 1993 dedicated over $2billion in new state and local funding tosupport the reforms from 1993 to 2000.The Act has five primary goals: estab-lishing standards for student outcomes;ensuring equitable funding; creating asystem of school accountability; im-proving the quality of all educationalpersonnel; and restructuring the StateEducation Agency (SEA) to improve itscapacity for implementing reform.

Professional development for teach-ers has been an important topic ofdiscussion at the state level. TheEducation Reform Act declares thestate's intention to improve the qualityand accountability of all educationpersonnel. This covers: setting stan-dards and regulations for personnel; aprocess for recertifying school person-



nel; a statewide plan for professionaldevelopment and recertification; andcriteria for performance standards foreducation personnel. Professional de-velopment is an integral part of reformingthe state system of public education,with funds and personnel dedicated tothis purpose. New recertification re-quirements for teachers have met somepolitical resistance, but the program isproceeding, and all school personnel arebe subject to certificate renewal in 1999.


Massachusetts is implementing acomprehensive statewide plan for pro-fessional development that incorporatesthe new recertification requirements,standards for professional development,and a statewide system of professionaldevelopment providers. The 1995-96State Plan for Professional Developmentspells out the relationship between thesuccess of education reform and theprofessional development of educators,and discusses the state's role incoordinating and stimulating "local,regional, and statewide professionaldevelopment programs that are focusedon curriculum reform, new approaches toeducational leadership, and expandingthe use of technologies for educationalimprovement." The objectives of thestate plan are:

to provide high-quality professionaldevelopment programs that arealigned with State Board ofEducation (SBE) priorities for edu-cational improvement;

to create a statewide network forprofessional development of schoolpersonnel;

to establish standards for profes-sional development programs;

to expand district capacity to deliverhigh-quality professional develop-ment;

to support reform of educationpreparation programs and perfor-mance-based assessment of educa-tors;

to maintain and enhance newlyestablished professional develop-ment provider and recertificationsystems;

to sponsor research on effectiveprofessional development practices;and

to disseminate exemplary state prac-tices in professional development.

The Education Reform Act of 1993requires districts, schools, and indi-vidual educators to establish profes-

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Coloration of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Institute9n Educational Governance, Finance, Polity- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

95

sional development plans, which aredeveloped and reviewed locally in

accord with school and district goals.The state provides guidelines, but doesnot evaluate or approve the plans.

Teacher Certification Policies.There are no mandated professionaldevelopment requirements for first-yearteachers in Massachusetts. The state isin the process of developing standardsfor the induction of new teachers. TheEducation Reform Act requires teacherassessment, but this provision of the lawhas not yet been implemented. The lawalso requires that districts maintainsupport programs for provisionally certi-fied teachers; state standards andguidelines for these programs are nowbeing developed.

The SBE was charged with develop-ing the specifics of the new staterecertification policy. Prior to theEducation Reform Act of 1993, teachersand administrators received life-timecertification. This policy has beenchanged to a five-year renewable certifi-cate. Massachusetts educators are upfor renewal for the first time on June 18,1999. Massachusetts has no certificateof advanced standing at this time.

New recertification regulations re-quire teachers to participate in profes-sional development activities linked totheir content area and focused onimproving classroom instruction tech-nique. In order to renew a teachingcertificate, teachers must obtain 120professional development "points" withinthe five-year period. A minimum of fourhours of a topic area is necessary toqualify for any points. Different types ofprofessional development activities earndifferent point amounts. For example,participating in a state-run workshopmay be worth one point per clock hourfor a participant, and three points perclock hour for a presenter. One one-credit university course may equal 15points per semester hour. The state alsoaccepts National Board Certificationactivities for professional developmentpoints.

The new recertification process isoutlined in a state-produced guide foreducators. The first step is thedevelopment an Individual ProfessionalDevelopment Plan (IPDP) that includes

2

the teacher's goals for strengtheningpractice and indicators of change for thefive-year period. The recommendedsecond step is teacher consultation withdistrict personnel because the IPDPmust support school, district, and stategoals, as well as individual goals. Thethird step is the actual participation inprofessional development activities andthe subsequent mailing of forms andfees. Educators must pay $100 every fiveyears for the standard certificate. Thiscost covers any number of certificatesrenewed at the same time; additionalcertificates renewed separately cost $25.

Recertification is not currently linkedto performance-based evaluation, al-though the Governor has advocated arecertification system based on person-nel evaluation. The SBE adopted a set of"Principles of Effective Teaching andAdministrative Leadership" for schooldistricts to use as a baseline indeveloping their own performance evalu-ation standards. Districts were sched-uled to submit their locally bargainedperformance standards to the SEA inSeptember of 1996.

As the system now stands, continu-ing education units (CEUs), coursecredits, and other professional develop-ment units do not have to be linked toteachers' assignments. However, inorder to protect their employability, thevast majority of educators are selectingthe area in which they are working fortheir primary certificate, which becomesthe focus of their professional develop-ment.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA coordinates a comprehensive pro-gram of professional development foreducators that focuses on the agency'sprofessional development goals. Thesewell-attended workshops and institutesfor teachers and administrators arefunded modestly. Nearly all new moneyfor professional development goes di-rectly to local education agencies.

The state Professional DevelopmentProvider program registers providerswho affirm that their services complywith state standards. School districts,higher education institutions, privateschools, collaboratives, and non-profitand for-profit educational associationsmay all apply to the SEA to register as

Professional Development Providers.Providers agree to designate a contactperson, affirm that they will offer high-quality professional development con-sistent with the "Characteristics for HighQuality Professional Development" out-lined below, keep records of activities forthe SEA to review, and award certificatesof completion for educators to submit forrecertification points. The SEA offerstechnical assistance to help providersmaintain records of their offerings andparticipating educators. The statecompiles a catalogue of professionaldevelopment providers and makes com-petitive grants to providers to meetperceived gaps in existing professionaldevelopment offerings.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Massachusetts participatesin Goals 2000 and the National ScienceFoundation's Statewide Systemic Initia-tive. Massachusetts has incorporatedprofessional development in its Goals2000 comprehensive reform plan byawarding subgrants to districts forimplementing promising professionaldevelopment initiatives. The Goals 2000grants enable districts to create Educa-tion Reform Study Groups focusing oneffective classroom and school restruc-turing practices, development of coher-ent K-12 curricula, effective classroomassessments, and teacher performancestandards. Districts received competi-tive awards in Years 1 and 2 andcontinuation funding in Year 3.

Boston Public Schools, the state'slargest school district, has received aChallenge Grant from the AnnenbergFoundation which is supporting schoolreform and professional development.


State Funds. The Education ReformAct of 1993 included substantial fundsallocated for the professional develop-ment of educators. The state's educa-tion budget contains a specific line itemfor professional development fundsdistributed to districts according toformula. In FY 1996, the professionaldevelopment line item was approximately$10 million. This amount does notinclude funds from other sources, such

Characteristics of High-Quality Professional DevelopmentFrom the Massachusetts Department of Education 1995-96 State Plan for Professional Development

Context

a shared vision for professional development within the district and the school that supports continuous improvementwhich is embedded in daily practice;coherent, high-quality professional development plans for districts and schools that are aligned with school, district,individual educator, and state goals;line item in district budgets that support professional development at a significant level;time and resources to plan, engage in, and assess professional development;supportive environments for educators to acquire, practice, and experiment with new learning;equitable access to opportunities for practicing, sharing, and disseminating successful practices on the job;collegiality and collaboration across and within professional roles;encouragement of and support for experimentation and risk taking.

Process:

involvement of participants in professional development design, implementation, and evaluation;models that promote multiple strategies for professional growth that could include reflection, mentoring, guidedpractice, and study groups;follow-up that focuses on the application of professional development to the improvement of student learning;an ongoing evaluation process that uses multiple sources of information, including changes in classroom/leadershippractices and student learning, and has a focus on all levels of the organization;understanding of effective approaches to professional development and their relationship to the culture of the schooland district;opportunities to learn from peers across and within differing educational goals;technologies for classroom management, instruction, and professional growth.

Content:

application of research, including principles of adult learning and the organizational change process;integration of the Common Core of Learning and the Curriculum Frameworks;discipline-specific and interdisciplinary approaches to teaching, learning, and assessment that incorporate highexpectations for all students;developmentally appropriate strategies for instruction and curriculum that meet the needs of diverse student learners;strategies for reaching out to and involving families and communities;leadership skill training for school administration and management.

as the Massachusetts Statewide Sys-temic Initiative (MSSI) grant from theNational Science Foundation, grants toeducators from other departments forhealth education, drug awareness, andviolence prevention. State funding is thelargest single source of money forprofessional development in Massachu-setts.

Federal Funds. The state receivesTitle 1 and Eisenhower money that isused for professional development ac-tivities. The MSSI provides funding forthe training of math and sciencespecialists. In Year 2 of Goals 2000, thestate received $6,990,859: $4,103,611 was

for subgrants for in-service professionaldevelopment activities; and $1,900,000was for pre-service professional devel-opment subgrants.

Local Funds. The Education ReformAct of 1993 called for districts to setaside funds for professional develop-ment equal to three percent of theamount spent on salaries. This set-asidewas not mandated. However, districtsare expected to calculate the threepercent figure and compare it with theirfunding levels. The figure is a

mechanism for calculating state reim-bursement of professional developmentcosts. Beginning in FY 1996, districts

97

must spend a minimum of $25 per studentfor professional development, which willbe reimbursed by the state. This amountincreased to $50 per student in FY 1997.


Districts are required by stateregulation to create professional devel-opment plans. These plans shouldreflect the state's professional develop-ment goals, comprehensive district goals,and goals outlined in individual SchoolImprovement Plans. (School Improve-

ment Plans are developed by schoolprincipals in consultation with eachsite's School Council.) The state alsorequires IPDPs as part of the newrecertification regulations. The Educa-tion Reform Act mandates that districtplans assist employees in the recertifica-tion process.

Districts can be state-registeredproviders of professional developmentpoints and offer a no-cost option for therecertification of teachers. The stateplan for professional development callsfor districts to have a budget line item forprofessional development, but they arenot mandated to do so. The EducationReform Act recommended that districtsdedicate a sum equivalent to threepercent of all school salaries to profes-sional development.


All bargaining for professional de-velopment in Massachusetts occurs atthe local level. Incentives and costreimbursements for teacher professionaldevelopment vary widely from district todistrict.

Teachers generally receive an incre-mental salary increase from their districtsbased on earned CEUs. The amount ofthe increment and approval process varyby district.


The state teachers' organizationsare registered providers that offerconferences and other professionaldevelopment opportunities for theirmembers. The Massachusetts Teach-ers' Association (MTA) provides on-site, ongoing technical assistance -tolocal affiliates and, in many cases, todistricts. The MTA has created newregional professional development pro-grams and, in 1996-97, will enter acollaborative effort with the Massachu-setts Association of School Superinten-dents.' Teacher organizations have beenrepresented on various SEA-appointedadvisory groups regarding professionaldevelopment.

Higher education institutions pro-vide professional development for edu-cators. In western Massachusetts, thefive-college consortium of the Univer-sity of Massachusetts at Amherst, SmithCollege, Amherst College, HampshireCollege, and Mount Holyoke Collegefocuses on teacher professional devel-opment. UMASS Boston has a fieldcenter for teaching and is involved inseveral initiatives at the state level.Fitchburg State College has a rigorousprofessional development center. Sev-eral state colleges are also reported to bemoving in this direction.

A wide variety of independentproviders, private consultants, and sub-ject-matter collaboratives offer profes-sional development programs. In 1996,the SBE awarded 15 grants to providersoffering innovative models of profes-sional development.


Susan FreedmanExecutive DirectorCertfication and Professional Develop-ment CoordinationMassachusetts Department of Educa-tion350 Main StreetMalden, MA 02148-5023617-388-3300, ext. 211

Cheryl OchsProfessional Development SpecialistCertfication and Professional Develop-ment CoordinationMassachusetts Department of Educa-tion350 Main StreetMalden, MA 02148-5023617-388-3300, ext. 215

Nora ToddMassachusetts Teachers Association20 Ashburton PlaceBoston, MA 02108617-742-7950


88





0 a 111 S

MichiganEducation Policy Context

Michigan serves approximately1.5 million students in its 561local school districts and 57

intermediate districts. The state has hada long history of local control overeducation policy. Since the 1970s, a"state mandate, state pay" lawtheHead lee Amendmenthas limited thestate's ability to set regulations for localschool districts. Nevertheless, the statehas taken the lead in education reform,setting education policy that has had asignifcant impact on local schools.

Current reform efforts, such asadopting model curricula and standardsfor student outcomes, modifying theschool accreditation system, and chang-ing the state's student assessmentsystem, have implications for teachersand their professional development. The1990 Public Act (PA) 25 requires schooldistricts to establish school improve-ment committees in each school build-ing. Districts must disseminate anannual report for each building and thedistrict as a whole that includes studentoutcome measures. PA 25 requires localand intermediate districts to incorporateprofessional development in their com-prehensive school improvement plans.These plans must be updated everythree to five years. In 1991, the state'sfirst high-stakes student assessmentprogram was implemented, requiring



students to pass assessments in math,reading, and science in order to receive astate-endorsed diploma. A new set ofassessments is being developed for1997.

PA 335, enacted in late 1993,completely restructured the way educa-tion is funded in the state, increasing thestate share from 45 to 80 percent. Thesame law mandated that local educationassociations (LEAs) develop and adopta core curriculum in math, science, socialstudies, and communication arts by1997. PA 335 increased funding forprofessional development, at-risk stu-dents, and Math/Science Centers, andwill extend the length of the school dayfrom five to six hours by 1999-2000.


Most decisions affecting teachers'professional development are made atthe district level. However, the state hasmade efforts to establish a vision anddirection for statewide professionaldevelopment. The state ProfessionalStandards Commission advises theMichigan State Board of Education(SBE) on teacher preparation and certifi-cation.

The Workgroup on ProfessionalDevelopment was established by theGovernor's Office, the Michigan Depart-ment of Education (referred to hereafter

as the state education agency, or SEA)and the Michigan Partnership for Educa-tion (a private non-profit collaborativegroup including representatives frombusiness, education, and state govern-ment) to create an action plan forprofessional development in the state.The Workgroup, supported by a 1994grant from the National Governors'Association, designed a plan to createnetworks for professional developmentproviders, to improve technology to helpmake professional development moreaccessible, to create demonstrationsites, and to support an ongoingevaluation of the plan. The Workgroupestablished guiding principles for qual-ity professional development that in-clude developing school and districtplans for staff development, ensuringequal access to high-quality providers,fostering collegiality among educationpersonnel, allocating significant time forprofessional development, balancingschool and individual needs and inter-ests, and accessing relevant technology.

An Intra-agency Professional De-velopment Coordination Committee de-veloped, based on the Workgroup'sguidelines, a definition of standards forprofessional development activitiesfunded by the state. In late 1995, the SBEadopted these standards and the follow-ing definition:

Uhis profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study and-esulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Institutew Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.Ibis profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in this publication are solely

`hose of the authors.

Professional development is a con-tinuous process of improvement topromote high standards of aca-demic achievement and respon-sible citizenship for all students.Professional development increasesthe capacity of all members of thelearning community to pursue life-long learning.

The state-adopted standards weredesigned to form "an infrastructure toassist local schools, academies andintermediate school districts to placeprofessional development opportunitieswithin the context of school improve-ment and to improve and provide accessto such opportunities for all schoolcommunities." The standards also serveas the criteria the SBE uses to awardfunding for professional developmentactivities.

Teacher Certification Policies. Newteachers in Michigan receive a six-yearprovisional teaching certificate. Theyare required by the state to receive 15days of professional development withinthe first three years of employment. Newteachers are also assigned mentorteachers for the first three years. There isno special evaluation or assessmentprocess for new teachers. There are noadditional requirements to meet to obtaina professional teaching certificate.

The professional certificate must berenewed every five years by completingsix semester hours of coursework or 18continuing education units. The SBE iscurrently considering National BoardCertification as a means of renewingcertification, but only for one term.

State-Supported Programs. TheSchool Development Unit in the SEAmaintains a staff dedicated to oversightof school improvement plans and profes-sional development. The Unit is alsoresponsible for overseeing the schoolaccreditation process, the annual educa-tion report, and school improvementplanning. Unit staff participate in manystate workshops. Other divisions in theSEA provide technical assistance toteachers and schools in specific areas,such as special education or vocationaleducation.

2

The state funds a network of Math/Science Centers that provide profes-sional development for teachers. Everydistrict in the state is served by one ofthe 25 Centers or eight affiliatedsatellites. Each Center receives fundingfrom the state and must set aside aportion of its funding for teacherprofessional development. The Centersare organized as a network, and theirdirectors meet quarterly.

Federal- or Fundation-SupportedPrograms. The state receives aStatewide Systemic Initiative (known asthe Michigan SSI, or the MSSI) grantfrom the National Science Foundation(NSF) to improve teacher professionaldevelopment. The MSSI informs theconsumers of professional developmentabout quality standards and works withproviders (such as the Math/Sciencecenters) to help improve their services.The MSSI is coordinating other NSFgrants in order to reduce duplication ofeffort.

Michigan uses Goals 2000 funds to:support local districts' efforts to developconnections between schools and com-munities; set higher standards forstudents; improve technology; developassessments to improve accountability;support professional development forteachers; and support structures thatpromote educational choices for families,including the establishment of charterschools.


State Funds. PA 335 eliminatedcategorical professional developmentprograms and established a line-item inthe state's budget for professionaldevelopment. Of the funds distributedby formula, 65 percent is allocated tolocal districts at approximately $4.25 perstudent for local activities, 15 percentgoes to intermediate school districts forprograms at the intermediate level, and20 percent goes to the SEA fordistribution on a competitive basis. Tenmillion dollars in state funds was setaside for professional development in1994-95. However, in 1996-97, state aidfor professional development was elimi-

10 0

nated. Math/Science Centers received$6 million in state funding in 1994, butwhat portion of those funds was used forteacher professional development is notknown.

Federal Funds. In FY 1995, Michi-gan received $9,838,660 in Eisenhowergrant money from the fedreal govern-ment. Michigan received $14,371,488 inGoals 2000 funding in Year 2. Thismoney was distributed to local districtsfor improvement efforts, including pro-fessional development for teachers. NSFfunds in addition to the MSSI grant arealso used for professional developmentin Michigan.

Local Funds. Education in Michi-gan is funded by the state. Most or allfunding for professional developmentcome from the state and federal govern-ments.


Local districts and ISDs are requiredto prepare a school improvement planthat incorporates professional develop-ment. Districts must develop, andupdate annually, professional develop-ment plans in order to receive statefunding for professional development.Local district plans are monitored byISDs, which forward the plans to theSEA for approval.

School Code 1527 requires districtsto set aside one day for professionaldevelopment beginning in the 1997-98school year. By the 2001-02 school year,districts must provide five days forprofessional development.


Collective bargaining affects profes-sional development at the local level.Teachers typically receive salary incre-ments based on professional develop-ment activities, such as collegecoursework. Teachers are generallyreimbursed for tuition and other profes-sional development costs. Decisionsabout reimbursement are made locallyand vary by district.


The Michigan Education Associa-tion (MEA), the largest teacher organiza-tion in Michigan, provides professionaldevelopment to its members. MEAoffers training on a broad range oftopics, including school improvementand other reform issues; hosts an 800number for educators to access informa-tion on professional development op-portunities around the state; and runsprofessional development schools, calledPioneer Schools. The MEA has beenactive in various statewide workinggroups and discussions related toprofessional development, such as set-ting state guidelines for professionaldevelopment. The American Federationof Teachers is active in Michigan, andmaintains a Quest Center in Detroit.

Subject-mater groups, such as theMichigan Reading Association and theMichigan Council of Teachers of Math-ematics, have played significant roles inproviding professional development andkeeping their members up-to-date oncurrent practices and objectives forstudent outcomes. These groupsprovide guidance on reform issues to thestate, as well as to their membership.There is a curriculum council for eachcurriculum area; each council providesprofessional development for its con-stituents.

The Michigan Partnership for NewEducation has been a major supporter ofteacher development in Michigan. Acollaborative effort among leaders inbusiness, education, and government, itwas established in 1990 as a non-profitcorporation supported by state andprivate funding. The partnership workedto provide different support structuresfor local schools such as the School andUniversity Alliance, which focused onthe creation and maintenance of school -university partnerships and includedworking with professional developmentschools; the Business and CommunityAlliance, which developed locally-basedcoalitions to support local innovation inschools; the Leadership Center, whichattempted to develop a critical mass ofleaders in education reform; and the

Education Extension Service, whichprovided practical researched-basedknowledge to schools. The partnershiphas reportedly turned over virtually allits staff and has changed its mission tobecome a chartering agency. It stillreceives state support, but the role itnow plays in professional developmentis unknown.


Carol LoganDirectorTeacher Preparation and CertificationMichigan Department of EducationP.O. Box 30008Lansing, MI 48909517-373-6505

Kathleen MayhewCoordinatorSchool Improvement and ProfessionalDevelopmentSchool Development UnitMichigan Department of EducationP.O. Box 30008Lansing, MI 48909517-373-6505

Maryanne AdamsConsultant for Professional Develop-ment and Human RightsMichigan Education AssociationP.O.Box 2537East Lansing, MI 48826517-335-6551


for 1993.

1 0 1





3


MinnesotaEducation Policy Context

Minnesota's public schoolscurrently serve 810,233students. The state is imple-

menting public education reform initia-tives covering a wide range of issues,including student standards, restructur-ing state delivery systems for children'sservices, and restructuring teacher licen-sure. The state is implementing a seriesof public school choice options. Minne-sota prides itself as a local control state,and most decisions regarding staffdevelopment take place at the districtlevel.

The 1993 Omnibus Education Actdirected the state Board of Education(SBE) and the agency now called theMinnesota Department of Children,Families, and Learning (referred tohereafter as the state education agency,or SEA) to develop results-orientedGraduation Standards. The proposedGraduation Standards have two compo-nents: the Profile of Learning and theBasic Skills Requirement. The Profile ofLearning includes over 60 contentstandards that address ten elements ofhigh academic achievement across thecontent areas. The Basic Skills Require-ment consists of a series of competencytests in reading, math, and writing. Inorder to graduate, students must passthe competency tests and complete aseries of assignments (known as a



performance package) that demonstratea high level of achievement in the Profileof Learning content standards. TheGraduation Standards were implementedbeginning with students entering theninth grade in the fall of 1996.

In October of 1995, Minnesota'sGovernor and legislature renamed andreorganized the SEA. The MinnesotaDepartment of Children, Families, andLearning was created to unify stateservices for children and families underone agency. The newly restructuredSEA is phasing in programs that servechildren from the state's departments ofhuman services, economic security,planning, corrections, and public safety.The reorganization is scheduled forcompletion by July of 1997.

The state is restructuring teacherlicensing to be performance-based. Un-der the new system, beginning teachershave to pass a new performanceassessment, consisting of three examina-tions, to obtain their initial licenses.They will be tested in basic skills,pedagogical knowledge, and licensure-specific skills. In addition, all beginningteachers must complete a one-yearinternship that includes mentoring, on-going professional development, andperformance assessment. New stan-dards for teachers are under develop-ment; the new system is scheduled forstatewide adoption by the year 2000.


Many of the SEA' s recent initiativesfocus on standards for students, butthey also incorporate professional de-velopment for educators. There is nocomprehensive state plan that deter-mines what professional developmentMinnesota's teachers receive. However,the state provides guidelines of whatprofessional development activities areacceptable for relicensure purposes, anddedicates resources for disseminatingbest practices to educators. The need toprepare educators for reform is ad-dressed through various state initia-tives. The state's Goals 2000 EducationImprovement Plan names teacher educa-tion and professional development asone of eight goals. Since 1984, the SEAhas provided ongoing support to schoolsby allocating resources directly todistricts for professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheMinnesota State Board of Teaching,established in 1973, oversees the licens-ing of teachers and is active in settingstandards for educators. The SEAPersonnel Licensing Team evaluates andprocesses all applications for initiallicensure and renewal of teacher andadministrative licenses, in accordancewith the rules set by the Board ofTeaching and the SBE. This team

ibis profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study and-exulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Institutew Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.rhis profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in this publication are solelyhose of the authors.

102

coordinates the review of college pro-grams to ensure that they meet therequirements of the Board of Teachingand the SBE.

New teachers who graduate from anapproved educator preparation programreceive a two-year license. New teachersreceive some support services, such asmentoring, but the services are notmandated by the state and vary fromdistrict to district. Most mentoringprovided new teachers is administeredby the state's teacher organizations, theMinnesota Federation of Teachers(MFT) and the Minnesota EducationAssociation (MEA). The first threeyears of a teacher's career are consid-ered probationary in terms of theirdistrict employment, but not in terms ofstate certification.

After successfully completing thefirst two years of teaching, educatorsmust undergo 125 clock hours ofprofessional development every fiveyears to renew their licenses. The hoursmay consist of any professional growthactivity accepted by district relicensingcommittees, the locally elected commit-tees that develop recommendations(within specified state guidelines) for therenewal of individual teaching licenses.The Board of Teaching is consideringNational Board Certification for onelicense renewal period. The state doesnot have a master-level teaching license.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA Minnesota Educational Effective-ness Program (MEEP II) and the Office ofDistrict Organization are both involvedin staff development for educators.Other SEA divisions, such as specialeducation and vocational education,provide technical assistance to schools.The SciMathMN project, established bythe legislature in 1993, is a partnershipbetween education and business leadersadvocating quality professional devel-opment for science and math teachers.

MEEP II provides a variety of schoolimprovement support services, particu-larly in the area of staff development. Inexistence since 1984, MEEP II is

currently helping schools prepare forGoals 2000 and the Graduation Rule. Thestate is divided into ten regions, each

2

with a MEEP II regional coordinator, ateam of content area and assessmentspecialists, and one or more pilot sitesfor the Graduation Standards. TheMEEP II regional coordinators presentand facilitate informational sessions onthe Graduation Standards; facilitatedistrict planning; support district siteteams in implementing their GraduationStandards plans; and provide informa-tional sessions on study groups, teambuilding, data-based decision making,and goal setting. They also designworkshops with district or schoolpersonnel to address district- or site-specific concerns, and provide informa-tion on the Best Practice Networks inReading, Math, Science, and Writing.

The Best Practice Networks (BPNs)are SEA-supported and selected teamsof educators who receive additionaltraining in their core content areas andthe curriculum standards outlined in thenew Graduation Rule. The four BPNshave teams in each MEEP II region. TheBPNs ensure that school programsmatch state guidelines and nationalstandards, help teachers try new tech-niques and find better teaching materi-als, build collaboration among teachingstaff members, and align assessmentwith instruction. The teams are availableto coach and mentor classroom teachersfor a small fee, which covers the cost ofsubstitute teachers, travel, and planningtime.

MEEP II also provides training ingraduation standards implementation forsuperintendents and principals; identifi-cation and training of a graduationstandards implementation technician ineach district; and regional informationsessions for the MEA and the MFT.MEEP II coordinates summer regionaltraining in support of the implementationof Graduation Standards.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Minnesota has an activeGoals 2000 initiative. The state receivedmoney to create a comprehensive planfor school improvement. Fifteen percentof the money received was disbursed assubgrants to districts or consortia ofdistricts for staff development. Threestaff development grants were awardedto districts in 1995.

1 0 3


State Funds. The state's budget hasno line item for professional develop-ment. However, the state has issuedgrants (ranging from $18,000 to $50,000)to districts for professional develop-ment. State funds for implementingGraduation Standards also support pro-fessional development. The amount offunding allocated to staff developmentactivities is estimated to be $20 million.

Federal Funds. In 1995, approxi-mately $103,000 was dispersed to threedistricts to implement professional de-velopment programs for teachers. Sec-ond-year Goals 2000 funding totaled $5.3million, of which 95 percent will beallocated to districts for implementationof the Graduation Standards. Approxi-mately $300,000 of this will be awarded todistricts for professional developmentgrants. Eisenhower funds and Chapter 1funds also support professional devel-opment activities. In FY 1995, Minne-sota received $3,717,752 in Eisenhowerfunding.

Local Funds. In 1993, the statemandated that two percent of a district'sgeneral state aid budget should be setaside for professional development.However, this law was repealed, andbeginning in the 1995-96 school year thetwo percent set-aside became optional.As a result, the bulk of funding forprofessional development is believed tocome from local budgets.

The Impact of State Policieson Local ProfessionalDevelopment

In 1993, the Minnesota legislatureestablished a process for staff develop-ment planning at the local level, whichincluded district staff development com-mittees. The committees, which consistof a teacher majority, align district staffdevelopment goals with the broadeducation outcome goals established bylocal boards of education. Individualschools, in turn, align their staffdevelopment plans with district goals.

The state established broad-based goalsfor staff development. District staffplans must fall within the scope of thestate's broad goals for staff develop-ment.

Minnesota had required districts toallocate at least two percent of theirgeneral revenue dollars for staff devel-opment activities. This money wasallocated as follows: 50 percentearmarked for districtwide staff develop-ment, 25 percent for sites, and 25 percentfor grants to exemplary programs. Thisrequirement was rescinded, beginning in1995-96, to allow districts greater latitudein professional development.

Districts are required to file with theSEA a self-assessment report thatoutlines their staff development activi-ties and expenditures, the perceivedstudent outcomes relevant to the activi-ties, and future goals based on the data.The purpose of the self-assessmentreport is to tie staff development tostudent-performance outcomes. Thestate does not mandate that a minimumnumber of days be set aside forprofessional development activities.


Professional development is bar-gained for at the local level. Mostdistricts reimburse teachers, at least inpart, for their expenses. Teachersreceive increases on the salary scale forcompleting certain kinds of professionaldevelopment activities. Many localunion chapters negotiate for ongoingprofessional development for their mem-bers.

The MFT helped to pass legislationentitling teachers to a peer reviewprocess that assists them in the develop-ment of their pedagogical skills. Schoolsmust have peer review committees forprobationary and for continuing con-tract teachers. These committees evalu-ate probationary teachers three timeseach year during the first three years ofemployment in order to help improveinstructional effectiveness. Similarly,the purpose of peer review for continu-ing teachers is to promote professional

growth. The committees do notdetermine whether a teacher should besuspended or terminated. Rather, theyprovide support, positive interaction,and opportunities for professionalgrowth. The peer review process is notlinked to licensure.


The MFT and the MEA are majorsources of professional developmentopportunities for teachers. They play anactive role in advocating quality profes-sional development opportunities fortheir members. They host workshopsand conferences and provide on-sitetechnical assistance and support. TheMFT and MEA also have their ownmentoring programs for new teachers.

The state-administered BPNs, ac-cessible on a regional basis, are asignificant source of professional devel-opment for teachers. The MinnesotaState Board of Teaching provides grantsto districts to establish mentoringprograms. Subject-matter teacher groupsalso provide professional development.

Higher education institutions areinvolved in professional developmentfor teachers at the local level, notably theprofessional development schools at theUniversity of Minnesota at Twin Citiesand Patrick Henry High School in

Minneapolis. Other partnerships existbetween local schools and area highereducation institutions. Higher educa-tion, however, does not seem to wieldgreat influence over state teacher profes-sional development policies.

The Minnesota Academic Excel-lence Foundation is a public-privatepartnership that sponsors mentoringprograms and conducts training withdistricts.

Shared Decisions Minnesota is anorganization that includes all of thestate's major education associations,including the SEA, the MFT and MEA,the administrators' organizations, andothers. They offer staff developmentand training in shared decision-makingand provide training in conflict resolu-tion and consensus building. This

104

project receives $300,000 per year fromthe legislature.


Mary PfeiferManagerDivision of Policy Development andReportingMinnesota Department of Children,Families and Learning602 Capitol Square Building550 Cedar StreetSt. Paul, MN 55101612-297-7204

Stephanie ParsonsState Coordinator for Staff Develop-mentMinnesota Department of Children,Families and Learning602 Capitol Square Building550 Cedar StreetSt. Paul, MN 55101612-296-1429

Judy WainMinnesota State Board of Teaching608 Capitol Square BuildingSt. Paul, MN 55101612-296-2415


for 1993.





3


MississippiEducation Policy Context

Mississippi has created astandards-based publiceducation system using per-

formance assessments and high-stakesaccountability measures at the locallevel. The current wave of reformemerged out of public discontent withthe state's traditionally low rankings inthe areas of student performance andinstructional capacity. The EducationReform Act of 1982 (HB 4) is consideredto be one of the most important pieces oflegislation ever to be passed in Missis-sippi. It was designed to achieve thefollowing outcomes: improved capacityfor state-level educational leadership byreorganizing the Mississippi Departmentof Education (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA); im-proved student achievement; increasedcompetence of teachers and administra-tors; and increased accountability ofeducational systems at the state andlocal levels. HB 4 promoted teacherprofessional growth by requiring localdistricts to implement systemwide staffdevelopment programs, revise teachercertification and recertification regula-tions, and establish a performance-based teacher evaluation system.

The SEA is currently developingcurriculum frameworks based on re-cently adopted content standards. Anew state performance-based assess-ment is being used to measure student



proficiency in the standards. Theassessment system was piloted in 1994-95 for grades 4-9 in English/languagearts and mathematics. Mississippi'snew high-stakes system uses studentachievement data as a key measure ofschool and district functioning. Districtsthat demonstrate poor student perfor-mance are targeted to receive specialtechnical assistance from the state and,in extreme cases, may be required toundergo "conservatorship" by the state.


State Superintendent of EducationDr. Tom Burnham has identified staffdevelopment as the "key to change andaccomplishing goals" and has indicatedthat the State Board of Education (SBE)places professional development withinits top three goals for school reform. TheEducation Reform Act of 1982 mandatesstaff development programming at thestate and local levels. Program guide-lines issued by the SEA define staffdevelopment as "a mandatory programof activities which is initiated by theschool district, based on identifiedinstructional needs and designed topromote continued demonstration of theessential competencies and responsibili-ties necessary for the school district tomeet its goals."

The SEA has issued staff develop-ment program guidelines; however,

local decision makers (representingdistrictwide input) are responsible forplanning, implementing, and evaluatingtheir own programs. The Commissionon School Accreditation sets guidelinesand oversees the approval process fordistrict staff development plans. The 15-member commission has an SBE-appointed membership that consists ofteachers, administrators, school boardmembers, and community leaders.

In October of 1995, Dr. Burnhamappointed a 24-member ProfessionalDevelopment Work Group and chargedit with developing a Mississippi Profes-sional Development Model. Membersof the Work Group represent teachers,administrators, student support ser-vices, business and industry, institu-tions of higher education, and the SEA.Several "draft" models were proffered forpublic input from all educational com-munities across the state before the finaldocument was approved by the SBE inMay of 1996. The new model isscheduled for implementation beginningJuly 1, 1997.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheCommission on Teacher and Administra-tor Education, Certification and Devel-opment (authorized under the EducationReform Act of 1982) is responsible formaking recommendations to the SBEregarding standards for the preparation,certification, and professional develop-ment of public school teachers andadministrators. The Commission also

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

105

monitors districts' training and evalua-tion programs for provisional teachers.Staffed by SEA personnel, the Commis-sion is comprised of 15 membersappointed by the SBE and representsteachers, administrators, institutions ofhigher education, local school boardmembers, and community members.

The Education Reform Act of 1982created a provisional license for newteachers, which is issued on a one-yearbasis for a maximum of three years.Provisional teachers are required toparticipate in a state-mandated, perfor-mance-based evaluation program. Ateam of trained evaluators uses theMississippi Teacher Assessment Instru-ment (MTAI) to assess mastery inteaching. As a minimum, the provision-ally licensed teacher must demonstratemastery of at least 60 percent of thecompetencies during the first year (aftertrial two) to obtain a second provisionallicense. During their second provisionalyear (after trial four) 75 percent of thecompetencies must be mastered toobtain a provisional license. Forteachers who require a third provisionalyear, (after trial six), 100 percent masteryis expected. A provisional teacher whohas made six unsuccessful attempts topass all competencies on the MTAI willnot be eligible for certification inMississippi. Consideration is currentlyunderway to make MTAI requirements apart of teacher presence training.

Upon completing requirements atthe provisional certification level, ateacher is eligible to receive a standardcertificate. This certificate is renewableevery five years, with the followingprerequisites: that teachers accumulate80 in-service credits (determined by theCommission on School Accreditationand awarded at the rate of one credit perhour) through district-sponsored staffdevelopment; and that either threesemester hours of non-repeat creditwithin a content area, four continuingeducation units (CEUs) from a state-approved CEU program or activity, or 40additional in-service credits have beenobtained. Once the standard certificateis issued, recertification is not attachedto a teacher evaluation process.

Teachers may augment their stan-dard certificates in two ways, by

2

completing 18 semester hours in acontent area and by completing aplanned program in an area such asspecial education, computer applica-tions, gifted education, or health educa-tion.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA provides guidance to districts in theplanning and implementation of theirstaff development plans. Through var-ious offices housed within the SEA (i.e.,the Office of Instructional Development,Office of Teacher Certification, andOffice of Leadership Development andEnhancement), the state also overseesteacher certification and evaluation andprovides technical assistance to dis-tricts. The Office of Accreditationmonitors districts' implementation oftheir staff development plans to ensurethat they adhere to guideline specifica-tions and address local improvementneeds.

The SEA conducts statewide train-ing activities related to state reforminitiatives such as the Tech Prep pro-gram, performance-based assessment,and curriculum initiatives. During thesummer of 1996, the SEA offered over37,000 hours of professional develop-ment opportunities. In addition, the SEAtrains school leadership teams in the"Onward to Excellence" school improve-ment process. Currently, over 200schools in one-third of Mississippi'sschool districts have initiated thisprocess for improving student perfor-mance.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Mississippi Writing/Thinking Institute is a network of sevenaffiliate sites of the National WritingProject that uses school-university part-nerships as a vehicle to improve K-12instructional practice. Headquartered atMississippi State University, the Writ -ing/Thinking Institute has created writ-ing projects at seven universities acrossthe state. Since its inception in 1985, theInstitute has provided 12 to 60 hours oftraining to more than 15,000 teachers inthe creative uses of writing across thecurriculum. Each summer, the Institutetrains a cadre of between 86 and 100 leadteachers in writing instruction skills,preparing them to be Teacher Consult-ants for the Institute. During the year,

106

the Institute engages these consultantsto provide staff development to districts.Typical district activities consist of fiveto ten three-hour sessions over thecourse of a year that give classroomteachers time to obtain feedback anddiscuss their experiences with others.During the 1994-95 school year, 3,716teachers representing 141 districts par-ticipated in the Institute's staff develop-ment series. Funding for Institute ac-tivities is secured primarily through astate appropriation with supplementalsupport from federal and private sources.The Institute. also collaborates with theSEA and was instrumental in the designand implementation of the statewidetraining effort for the new performance-based assessment system.

Goals 2000 funds are being used tosupport local school improvement initia-tives in the areas of performance-basedassessment, curriculum revision, profes-sional development, and instructionaltechnology. Goals 2000 subgrants havebeen awarded to at least one local districtor district consortium in each ofMississippi's five congressional dis-tricts.


State Funds. The passage of theEducation Reform Act established cat-egorical aid for district staff developmentactivities, averaging $10.50 per Fib.However, this appropriation was elimi-nated in 1990, and districts now receiveno state funds that are earmarkedspecifically for professional develop-ment. Mississippi's legislature has, onoccasion, appropriated funds to supportstatewide teacher training in the areas ofcurriculum standards, performance-basedassessment, and instructional technol-ogy. In 1994-95, the SEA was allocated$500,000 to implement a training programon the new assessment. For the 1995-96year, the SEA received $250,000 toprovide teacher training on the newcurriculum frameworks. An additional$250,000 in state funds was appropriatedto support training activities offeredthrough the Mississippi Writing/Think-ing Institute.

Federal Funds. Like many otherstates, Mississippi relies heavily onfederal funding sources such as theEisenhower Professional Developmentgrant ($3.6 million in FY 1995), Goals 2000($1.3 million in FY 1995), and otherfederal programs to support professionaldevelopment at the local level.

Local Funds. The SEA Coordinatorfor Professional Development reportsthat funding for staff development islargely a "local responsibility" and oftenfalls short due to the competing de-mands placed on strained local budgets.


Districts are required to implement astaff development plan that offers aminimum of 26 hours of in-service credit.State guidelines recommend that districtplans be developed by a committeeconsisting primarily of teachers andincluding administrators, school boardmembers, and community members. Thecontent of the staff development plan isbased on data collected through a localneeds assessment.

Each district must designate a staffdevelopment coordinator who receivestraining from the SEA and who attendsongoing meetings throughout the yearon how to use student performance datato guide decisions regarding staffdevelopment needs. Districts that donot submit an annual plan or developplans that do not meet approval areconsidered to be at risk of losing theiraccreditation.

Mississippi's current school-yearcalendar provides seven days thatdistricts may assign for in-service,record-keeping, or other activities. Thisprovision is included in teacher con-tracts.


Teacher salaries are determined by astate schedule that awards incrementsfor years of experience and advanceddegrees or graduate credits earned.Recently, legislation was passed to

award National Board Certified teachersan annual pay increase of $3,000 for theten-year life of the certificate. Board-certified teachers are also reimbursed forthe $2,000 cost of undergoing theassessment. Currently, there are threeBoard-certified teachers in Mississippi.

Teacher compensation for participa-tion in professional development activi-ties may be offered at the discretion ofindividual districts. Most educatorsreported, however, that tuition reim-bursement, stipends, and salary en-hancements are not common.


The Mississippi Staff DevelopmentCouncil (MSDC), formed in 1986, is astate network of staff developers thatseeks to promote professional staffdevelopment standards. Currently, over200 educators throughout the stateparticipate in MSDC activities, whichinclude: an annual three-day conferencefeaturing both national and state leadersin the field of staff development; aquarterly newsletter; and access tomaterials and resources generated by theNational Staff Development Council.MSDC activities are governed by aBoard of Directors that consists ofelected officers and seven members-at-large, as elected by the general member-ship.

The Mississippi Council of Teach-ers of Mathematics (MCTM) is com-prised of more than 1,100 mathematicseducators who meet and exchange ideasto improve the mathematics instructionoffered by elementary, secondary, andpostsecondary institutions. Each year,MCTM sponsors a statewide confer-ence with over 100 workshop sessions.The group also publishes two newslet-ters, "Math Minutes" and "The MathNew Network." Teacher recognition is amajor focus of MCTM activities, asevident in its Teacher of the Year awardsand the Mathematics Education TrustFund, which provides teachers with $250mini-grants to support creativity andinnovation in mathematics instruction.MCTM continually develops and con-

107

ducts teacher training programs thatdirectly respond to state reforms incurriculum and assessment. Funding forMCTM training programs is provided bythe SEA through federal Eisenhowerfunds.

Regional consortia have been formedto allow geographically remote and smalldistricts to pool their resources andshare ideas in order to obtain qualitytechnical assistance and professionaldevelopment services. Nine consortiacurrently exist in Mississippi and, whilethe governance structure varies bypartnership, most are affiliated with oneor more institutions of higher education(IHEs)

Generally speaking, IHEs in Missis-sippi offer coursework as their primarydelivery model for teacher professionaldevelopment. However, an initiativefunded by the Andrew W. MellonFoundation during the mid-1980s at-tempted to expand this role by bringingtogether IHEs, district leaders, teachers,and the SEA to conduct a joint reviewand planning process regarding staffdevelopment needs and issues. Keyrecommendations produced by theproject were: IHE services should bedesigned to meet the local needs ofdistrict teachers; IHE faculty shouldprovide staff development services atthe school-site; staff development ac-tivities should be evaluated; and astatewide staff development boardshould be created to provide ongoingcredibility and financial support forshared decision making in policies andprograms affecting continuing teacherdevelopment. Although it is difficult todocument the legacy of the Mellonproject, the participation of IHEs in theCommission on Teacher and Administra-tor Education, Certification, and Devel-opment and district consortia staffdevelopment planning indicates thatthey are valued partners in the provisionof professional development.

3


Johnny A. FranklinDirectorOffice of Instructional DevelopmentMississippi Department of EducationP.O. Box 771, Suite 804Jackson, MS 39205601-359-3778

Joan P. HaynieCoordinator of Staff DevelopmentOffice of Instructional DevelopmentMississippi Department of EducationP.O. Box 771, Suite 804Jackson, MS 39205601-359-3778

Sherry SwainDirectorMississippi Writing and ThinkingInstituteP.O. Box 6077Mississippi State, MS 39702601-325-7777


Guidelines for Staff Development Pro-grams. Mississippi Department of Edu-cation (May 1992).

Designing the Staff Development Systemof the Future. Mississippi Public Educa-tion Forum (September 1993).

Professional Development Task Force:Findings and Recommendations. Mis-sissippi Public Education Forum (1995).

1 Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures are

for 1993.





1O&


MissouriEducation Policy Context

Missouri's public school sys-tem consists of 525 schooldistricts and serves a student

population of 866,544. Since the mid-1980s, the state's education reformpolicies have focused on ensuring thatall school districts have equitable accessto professional development resourcesand opportunities.

The Excellence in Education Act of1985 mandated the establishment ofdistrict-level professional developmentcommittees (PDCs) to oversee local in-service activities. This law also requireddistricts to provide a two-year mentoringsupport program for beginning teachers.The Outstanding Schools Act of 1993(SB 380) mandated that the State Boardof Education (SBE) develop "academicperformance standards" identifying theknowledge, skills, and competenciesnecessary for students to advancesuccessfully through the public schoolsystem. SB 380 also required the SBE toprovide curriculum frameworks to assistdistricts in redesigning local curricula tomeet the performance standards.Teacher-based committees developedthe curriculum frameworks, which wereofficially adopted in December of 1995.During the 1996-97 school year, theMissouri Department of Education (re-ferred to hereafter as the state educationagency, or SEA) will begin phasing incomponents of the state's new perfor-mance-based assessment system, which



will be used to track student outcomes inrelation to the standards. By the 1997-98school year, districts will implementlocally designed curricula based on theframeworks, and by the fall of 1998 thenew assessment will be one of the criteriaused in the School Improvement Pro-aram-

SB 380 created a new foundationformula expected to raise $390 million forpublic education. The new fundingformula provides resources to promotetechnology in the schools, developspecial programs for at-risk populations,fund full-day kindergarten, expand sum-mer instructional programs, and set asidea specific amount for professionaldevelopment. Beginning in the 1994-95school year, each school district had tocommit 1 percent of its state aid money(exclusive of categorical add-ons) forprofessional development. In addition, 1per-cent of its state aid funds wasearmarked for the SEA to "disseminateinformation about successful profes-sional teaching practices and programs."


Missouri does not have a formalstate plan for professional development,although SEA staff are currently using aconcept paper entitled "Teacher Prepa-ration: Recruitment to Retirement" tohelp shape a strategic plan for teachercertification and professional growth.This plan was presented to the legisla-

ture during the spring of 1996 session. Itproposes revisions in preservice educa-tion, teacher certification, and profes-sional development requirements basedon standards established by the Na-tional Council for Accreditation ofTeacher Education (NCATE), the Inter-state New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium (INTASC), and theNational Board for Professional Teach-ing Standards (NBPTS).

A key provision of SB 380 was theestablishment of nine Regional Profes-sional Development Centers (RPDCs).During the 1993-94 school year, the SEAconducted a national review of theliterature and sponsored a series ofeducator forums to solicit ideas onprofessional development. The result-ing principles, which serve as guidelinesfor the RPDCs, are:

1. educators must acknowledge thelink between professional growthand changed behavior;

2. there must be communication andcollaboration between professionaldevelopment providers and con-sumers;

3. professional development must belinked to school improvement; and

4. professional development designsmust be based on research from thefield.


109

The SEA convenes bi-monthlymeetings of all RPDC directors todiscuss implementation issues and re-spond to programming needs. In add-ition, Missouri is a partner state with theNational Commission on Teaching andAmerica's Future and will undergo ateacher development policy audit, theresults of which will be used to institute acomprehensive plan for teacher profes-sional development.

Teacher Certification Policies.Passed in 1985, House Bill 1457 createdthe Missouri Advisory Council onCertification to review policies and issuerecommendations for teacher certifica-tion. The Advisory Council helped torevise teacher licensing policies thatbestowed life-time certificates. The newpolicy consists of a three-tier licensingstructure, based on years of teachingexperience, and was officially adoptedby the SBE in 1988.

The Professional Certificate I (PCI)is a non-renewable, three-year certificateissued to beginning teachers. TheExcellence in Education Act requireseach district to provide a locallydesigned two-year mentoring and pro-fessional development program for PCIteachers. Beginning teachers mustaccumulate 30 clock hours of in-servicetraining over a three-year period, suc-cessfully complete a performance-basedevaluation, and are expected to berequired to pass a performance test in thefuture. If PCI requirements are notsatisfied at the end of the first three-yearperiod, an extension may be grantedunder special circumstances.

The Professional Certificate II (PCII)is a seven-year certificate renewableupon completion of 30 clock hours of in-service training and 12 semester hours ofcollege course credit. Teachers whohave a master's degree are exempt fromthe additional college credit requirement.PCII teachers must also continue tofollow and update their individualprofessional development plans.

The Continuous Professional Cer-tificate (CPC) is a ten-year certificate thatis awarded to teachers with a minimum often years of in-state teaching experienceand a master's degree in education ortheir content area of certification. Teach-ers with ten years of experience whohave acquired National Board Certifica-

2

tion also qualify for this certificate. Onceobtained, there are no additional renewalrequirements at the CPC level.

Teacher licensing applications areadministered by the SEA' s Division onUrban and Teacher Education. Thisoffice is working with the AdvisoryCouncil on Certification, the Universityof Missouri, and other state-level expertsin core content areas to develop K-12teaching competencies that are based onMissouri's performance standards andINTASC principles. The teaching com-petencies are expected to be establishedby the fall of 1997, and training in thecompetencies will become a requiredcomponent for teacher education pro-gram accreditation. The SEA also plansto implement a Teacher Academy Pro-gram in 1997 that will help teachersprepare for National Board Certification.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA houses an Office of ProfessionalDevelopment that oversees the profes-sional development activities of fourstatewide school improvement initia-tives: Select Teachers as RegionalResources (STARR), the Missouri As-sessment Project (MAP 2000), theAccelerated Schools Program, and theRe:Learning Project. The Office ofProfessional Development has set aside5 percent of its operating budget forprogram evaluation. The SEA con-tracted with the North Central RegionalEducational Laboratory (NCREL) toconduct a comprehensive evaluation,and a report was expected in July of 1996.

Created by SB 380, the STARRprogram identifies and develops cadresof teachers to serve as district-leveltrainers and consultants. STARRteachers participate in a two-year train-ing and leadership program that coversinstructional techniques based onMissouri's academic performance stan-dards. Since 1994, 23 teachers have beenselected each spring to participate in theSTARR program, which begins with athree-day summer workshop on authen-tic instruction. During the school year,STARR teachers practice workshoptechniques in their classrooms andattend regional and state-level meetingswith other participants. During theirsecond year, STARR teachers are givena paid leave of absence to work withRPDC staff to provide in-service training

110

to districts around the state (the stateprovides funds to pay for replacementteachers). Each spring, a new cadre of 23teachers with at least three years ofexperience is selected. The selectioncommittee, which also determines thefocus of each cadre's training, consistsof SEA staff, higher education institu-tions, teacher organizations, and K-12administrators and teachers.

SB 380 also created MAP 2000 totrain Missouri's public school educatorsin the skills necessary to implement thestate's new performance-based assess-ment (expected to be implemented in1996-97). MAP 2000 teachers partici-pate in a three-year training program thatdevelops their skills in performanceassessment development, use, and scor-ing. Teachers are nominated by homedistricts or by a professional educatororganization. The district is required tosupply a minimal financial commitmentand teacher release time. During 1995-96,participation in MAP 2000 was optional;however, SEA officials estimate that 40percent (200) of Missouri's districts wereinvolved.

In 1988, Missouri became involvedin the Accelerated Schools Project. Over125 Missouri schools are members of theAccelerated Schools network. Theseschools have made a commitment to aprocess of change that values shareddecision making and promotes highexpectations for all students. The SEAprovides ongoing training to networkparticipants through three regional Ac-celerated Schools centers. Teams fromfirst-year network members are requiredto attend a week-long summer academyand monthly meetings throughout theschool year. Continuing member teamsattend cross-site meetings three timeseach year. Every Accelerated Schoolreceives on-site assistance and mentorvisits throughout the year and partici-pates in a two-day retreat held in June.

Additional SEA programs include:MAST, an electronic answer line thatprovides information on educationtrends, curriculum development, andMissouri's new standards; Project Con-struct, which provides training for pre-Kthrough grade 2 teachers in ProjectConstruct curriculum, instruction, andassessment; Success Leads to Success,which identifies exemplary school im-

4

provement programs and provides fundsfor staff to observe site activities, receiveresource materials, and attend confer-ences; the Missouri Assessment Project,which provides professional develop-ment in the use of standards and per-formance assessments offered throughthe New Standards Project; the NetworkProject, which provides technologytraining; and the Transitional MiddleSchool Certification Program, whichoffers tuition reimbursement for teachersand administrators in grades 5-9 whosatisfactorily complete coursework nec-essary for middle school certification.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Re:Learning Project hasbeen a component of Missouri's schoolimprovement efforts since 1993. Cur-rently, 100 schools representing over3,000 teachers participate in Re:Learningprofessional development activities.Schools that commit to Re:Learning areeligible to receive an incentive grant ofup to $10,000 for each of their first threeyears in the project. All Re:Learningschool personnel participate in week-long summer institutes held at variousproject sites throughout the state.Schools with less than four years in theproject receive Level I summer institutetraining that reinforces Re:Learningphilosophies. More experiencedRe:Learning schools receive Level IIsummer institute training that focuses onadvanced concepts.

Missouri is using Goals 2000 fundsto award subgrants in five focal areas,one of which is professional develop-ment. The subgrant process encouragescollaboration among districts, colleges,businesses, and RPDCs in designingand implementing professional develop-ment strategies that simultaneouslysupport the district's school improve-ment efforts and its redesign of theteacher education program. Granteesreceive continuing funding for up to fouryears, provided they substantiate theprogress and impact of their comprehen-sive plans.

The National Science Foundationhas awarded an Urban Systemic Initia-tives (USI) grant to the St. Louis PublicSchools. These funds are being using tosupport professional development inmathematics and science.


State Funds. As mentioned earlier,2 percent of all state-aid funds for publiceducation is earmarked for professionaldevelopment. According to one SEAofficial, this allocation totals $20 millioneach year ($10 million for state-spon-sored programs, and $10 million fordistrict-sponsored activities). RPDCsare funded at the level of $1.5 milliondollars ($150,000 for each of the ninecenters). State funds for the RPDCs arereduced or eliminated after the first threeyears of program operation, once thecenters become self-sustaining. Theannual operating budget for the STARRprogram is $1 million. The state allocatesapproximately $900,000 per year tosupport the Accelerated Schools Project.The 1995-96 Re:Learning Project has astate budget of $578,000. The CareerLadder Program (described below), whichreceives a separate appropriation fromthe legislature, has an average annualbudget of $26 million per year.

Federal Funds. During 1995-96,Missouri received a $3.5-millionEisenhower Professional Developmentgrant and a $6.5-million Goals 2000 grant(a portion of which was used to supportprofessional development activities).Other federal programs, such as Title I,Title II, and Perkins, also provide fundsfor teacher training activities.

Local Funds. A local set-aside of 1percent of state-aid funds must beallocated for professional development.


The Excellence in Education Actrequires each district to establish a PDCto oversee the planning and implementa-tion of local in-service and beginningteacher mentoring activities. By law, thePDCs are governed by classroom teach-ers and are responsible for determiningstaff development activities as identifiedin a district's annual strategic plan.Although the PDCs have functioned inthis capacity since 1988, it was not untilSB 380 that a percentage of districts'

111

state-aid funds (1 percent) was man-dated to be allocated specifically for theimplementation of professional develop-ment plans. The PDCs manage thebudget for the 1 percent allocation andidentify the contractors and services forlocal in-service activities.

There are no mandated in-service ornon-instructional days built into theofficial school year calendar. However,state guidelines require districts to"provide time" for staff developmentprograms.


There is no collective bargaining inthe state of Missouri. All districts have asalary schedule that considers graduatecredits and years of experience indetermining salary increments. SB 380mandates that, effective in the 1996-97school year, teachers with a master'sdegree and ten years of teachingexperience will receive a minimum salaryof $24,000a $6,000 increase above thesalaries of teachers without a master'sdegree. At the same time, however, SB380 rescinded the state's tuition reim-bursement program for teachers.

Missouri offers a Career LadderProgram, created by the Excellence inEducation Act. Teachers who choose toparticipate in the program may earnannual salary supplements of $1,500,$3,000, or $5,000, based on years ofteaching experience and classroom per-formance. Although the bulk of fundsfor this program is acquired through astate appropriation, participating dis-tricts must commit a portion of localfunds. The Career Ladder Programrequires participating teachers to as-sume added responsibilities in the areasof professional growth, school/commu-nity involvement, or faculty collabora-tion. A 1994 review of the prograniestimated that 229 districts and 10,500teachers were involved in this activity.

STARR teachers receive a $100 per-day stipend plus expenses for theirparticipation in the summer trainingworkshop. Expenses incurred fromattending STARR meetings, orderingmaterials, and conducting training ses-sions are also reimbursed by the SEA.


The Missouri National EducationAssociation (MNEA) is a major profes-sional development provider and is oneof three teacher organizations in thestate that offers services in this area.Through its Instruction and ProfessionalDevelopment Division, the MNEA con-ducts teacher training activities at thestate, regional, and local levels. TheMNEA hosts an annual, one-day confer-ence in the spring on instructionalstrategies. The MNEA also specializes inconducting workshops for districts'PDCs that, among other things, providecommittee members with an overview ofthe law governing the use of PDC funds.

Institutions of higher educationhave taken a leadership role in the designand delivery of professional develop-ment for practicing educators. In July of1994, the SEA selected nine Missouricolleges and universities to serve asRPDC sites, which offer a cost-efficientand systemic approach to ensuring thatall districts have equal access toinformation and resources that reflectbest teaching practices. While the statehas provided start-up funds to supportRPDC activities, the primary fundingbase will be secured through service feescharged to local districts. By mandate,RPDCs are university-based tostrengthen linkages between highereducation institutions and districts.RPDC policies and activities are deter-mined locally by an executive board,comprised primarily of teachers, andadministered by a center director.

Cooperating Schools Districts (CSD)is a consortium of 46 member districtslocated in the greater St. Louis metropoli-tan area. Founded in 1928, CSD'smission is to enhance educationalopportunities for all children by provid-ing technical assistance, resource mate-rials, and training to educators. Nearly40 percent of all Missouri public schoolteachers participate in CSD activities.Districts pay dues (based on wealth andstudent population) to participate in theconsortium and may opt for a full orassociate membership.

The Learning Exchange in KansasCity, Missouri, is a non-profit educa-tional center for research, development,

and innovation. Since 1972, The Learn-ing Exchange has provided school-sitecoaching and training, as well asleadership and curriculum development,to support and equip educators inimplementing effective, innovative in-structional practice. It addresses thestaff development needs of educators inmore than 300 school districts in Kansasand Missouri and over 1,000 districtsnationally. The Learning Exchange isalso the home of Exchange City andEarth Works, both large-scale learninglabs with integrated curricula and simula-tions in economics, mathematics, andscience that are visited by more than35,000 students, teachers, and parentsannually. Funding for The LearningExchange is provided by businesses andfoundations, as well as client fees fromservice membership packages, programenrollments, and individual trainingactivities.

The Missouri State Teachers Asso-ciation (MSTA) is an organization ofeducators to advance the ideals andstandards of the teaching professionand to secure conditions necessary forthe greatest efficiency of public schoolsin Missouri. Organizationally, MSTA iscomposed of over 500 local CommunityTeachers Associations (CTAs), 12 dis-trict associations, 37 departments, anAssembly of Delegates and 11 statewidecommittees including the ExecutiveBoard. Services provided to its member-ship include lobbying and legislativereport, legal and financial assistance foreducators, field service and salaryschedule consultation, publications, re-search, insurance, professional organi-zations, departments, leadership confer-ences, workshops and clinics, publicrelations, assistance with CTA pro-grams, recreation, curriculum aids, creditunions, in-service training, improvementof instruction conferences and currentissues in education conferences. Formore information, contact:

Dr. John A. JonesResearch Coordinator407 S. Sixth St., P.O. Box 458Columbia, MO 65205Phone: 573-442-3127e-mail: john..jones @mail.msta.org

112


Celeste FergusonAssistant CommissionerDivision on Urban and TeacherEducationMissouri Department of Elementary andSecondary Education205 Jefferson Street, 6th FloorJefferson City, MO 65102314-751-2931

Douglas MillerCoordinator of ProfessionalDevelopmentMissouri Department of Elementary andSecondary Education205 Jefferson Street, 6th FloorJefferson City, MO 61502314-751-2200


for 1993.





0 a 4 II' .

MontanaEducation Policy Context

Montana is a very large statewith a small, geographicallydispersed K-12 population of

about 164,000 enrolled in its 465 dis-tricts. An elected superintendent ofpublic instruction and a Board of PublicEducation, appointed by the governor,share responsibilities for school-systempolicy making, supervision, and manage-ment. Each district is governed by anelected local board of trustees.

In 1987, the state legislature estab-lished Project Excellence, which broughttogether educators, elected officials, andother constituent groups to design avision for quality education in Montana.Project Excellence resulted in the devel-opment of new school accreditationstandards, which were adopted in 1989.The accreditation standards includeprogram area standards in communica-tion arts, fine arts, health enhancement,mathematics, science, social studies,vocational/practical arts, library media,and guidance. Districts are required todevelop curricula that incorporate theseprogram standards, addressing at leastone of the nine program area standardseach year. By the year 2000, districtcurricula must reflect all nine areas andbe aligned with a local assessmentprocess to ensure the effectiveness ofthe process.

Beginning in the 1996-97 schoolyear, schools may choose to participate



in a performance-based accreditationprocess for which they develop aschool/community profile, an educationmission statement, learner outcomes,and a five-year school improvementplan. The Office of Public Instruction(OPI) is developing a performance-basedaccreditation manual, which will recom-mend professional development as acomponent of the school improvementplan.

There is neither a state corecurriculum nor any state assessment.However, districts are required to annu-ally report test results for students ingrades 4, 8, and 11. The Montana Ed-ucational Telecommunications Network(METNET) provides telecommunicationsservices among educators in K-12education, the university system, andstate offices. Toll-free numbers allowschools to access this network.


Montana does not have a stateprofessional development plan or stan-dards, nor has the State Board ofEducation (SBE) adopted an overarchingpolicy statement in this regard. Statemandates for teacher professional growthare, for the most part, imbedded in therecertification process described below.

In addition, Montana is a partnerstate with the National Commission onTeaching and America's Future and will

undergo a teacher development policyaudit, the results of which will be used toinstitute a comprehensive plan forteacher professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheMontana Certification and PracticesAdvisory Council (CSPAC) was estab-lished by the legislature in 1987. Itaccepts charges from the SBE and othergroups to study and make recommenda-tions in the areas of certificationstandards and policies, teacher educa-tion programs, and standards for profes-sional practice. The SBE-appointed,seven-member council consists of threeteachers, one K-12 specialist, one facultymember from an approved teachereducation program, one school adminis-trator, and one local school boardmember. CSPAC is staffed by a full-timeSBE administrator, and its activities arefunded by the revenue raised fromcertification fees.

CSPAC initiated the Montana Be-ginning Teacher Support Program(BTSP) in 1992, as a three-year researchproject to study whether and how one-on-one mentoring relationships betweenveteran and first-year teachers facilitatedthe pace and quality of a new teacher'sdevelopment into a competent teacher.Thirty-five mentor/first-year teacher pairsrepresenting schools throughout thestate participated in the study. Acomparative analysis (using a non-mentored controlled group) was em-ployed. The final report concluded that

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


mentoring support received during thefirst year significantly enhanced teacherretention rates and competency (asgauged through teacher evaluationsconducted by principals). To promotethe implementation of mentoring pro-grams statewide, CSPAC is developing abeginning-teacher support resourcemanual that interested local schools mayuse in designing their programs.

Beginning teachers are issued aClass 2 Standard Certificate, which isrenewable every five years upon acquir-ing 60 renewal units (two-thirds of whichmust be earned through college credit)and one year of teaching experience.Renewal units may be earned throughcollege coursework or approved in-service activities. Renewal units areawarded at the rate of one per clock hour.

The Class 1 Professional Certificate,valid for five years, is issued to teacherswho either earn a master's degree,complete 30 graduate credit hours, orundergo a fifth-year internship and whohave three years of successful teachingexperience. Prior to 1995, one year ofteaching experience was the only re-newal requirement for the professionalcertificate. Now, Class 1-certified teach-ers must earn 60 renewal units in additionto teaching experience in order to renewthe professional certificate.

In 1995, OPI issued a list ofapproved renewal unit providers, whichinclude regionally accredited collegesand universities, state-accredited schoolsystems, professional education organi-zations, and governmental agencies.Providers may award renewal units forthe professional development activitiesthey conduct. School systems have theadditional authority to award renewalunits for in-service activities conductedby providers that are not on the SBE-approved list (e.g., out-of-state confer-ences). To be approved, providers mustsubmit an application and undergo acompliance process that consists ofproviding OPI with an annual report oftheir professional development pro-grams, participating in OPI audits, andkeeping records of descriptions, dates,locations, and numbers of participantsfor renewal unit activities.

CSPAC is reviewing the work of theNational Board for Professional Teach-

ing Standards to study the role thatNational Board Certification might playin acknowledging exemplary classroomteachers in Montana. There arecurrently no National Board certifiedteachers in Montana. However, the SBEhas ruled that any out-of-state, NationalBoard Certified teacher (already certifiedin another state) should receive auto-matic state certification when they beginteaching in Montana.

State-Supported Programs. TheOPI has reduced its staff within the pasttwo years due to fiscal cutbacks. TheOPI reorganization eliminated nine cur-riculum specialist positions; there arecurrently five state specialists who areavailable to provide districts with techni-cal assistance and/or in-service trainingin the general areas of instructionaltechnology, curriculum and assessment,school improvement, and professionaldevelopment. Ten curriculum consortiasupport and facilitate statewide meet-ings and workshops on accreditationstandards and model learning goals.These activities are conducted to helpdistricts comply with curriculum andassessment development requirements.Consortia members represent OPI, pro-fessional educator organizations, andinstitutions of higher education.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Systemic Initiative forMontana Mathematics and Science(SIMMS) was established in 1991 with afive-year, $10-million Statewide SystemicInitiative (SSI) grant from the NationalScience Foundation. SIMMS sought toreform mathematics instruction at thesecondary level by developing aninnovative, multi-disciplined, technol-ogy-integrated curriculum and by train-ing teachers to understand and imple-ment the new curriculum. Teachersreceived training on the use of newassessment techniques. Over 500 highschool math teachers have attendedSIMMS summer institutes and extendedstudy courses. SIMMS also initiatedprofessional development in science.The Montana Council of Teachers ofMathematics (MCTM) managed SIMMSand, in collaboration with the MontanaScience Teacher Association (MSTA),formed the Montana Mathematics andScience Society (MMASS). MMASS is

114

dedicated to continuing curriculum andinstructional reform. Although SSIfunding expired in 1996, SIMMS goalsare being used as guidelines by OPI andthe Office of Higher Education forawarding Eisenhower grants.

The OPI was required by thelegislature to return federal Goals 2000funds and discontinue any Goals 2000activities.


State Funds. The state does notappropriate any funds specifically forprofessional development. However,the formula for general school aidincludes funding for a maximum of seven"pupil instruction-related" (PIR) daysthat districts may use for in-serviceactivities. Districts must use at leastthree of these days for instructional andprofessional development or other in-service training.

Federal Funds. Montana received a$1.2 million Eisenhower grant in 1995-96.Schools apply annually to receiveEisenhower professional developmentgrants. SSI and state funds were al-located at approximately $122 per stu-dent ($6 million total) per year to supportSIMMS training activities, and $3 millionwas allocated to schools implementingthe SIMMS curriculum for technologypurchases.

Local Funds. Professional develop-ment activities conducted by districtsare supported through their general fundbudgets, which include local revenues.


Districts are required to develop a"plan of action" describing the intendeduse of the three or more state-funded PIRdays devoted to professional develop-ment. School accreditation standardsstipulate that the use of PIR days bedetermined through shared decisionmaking by teachers and administrators.

Districts are required to allocate twoPIR days for professional developmentto coincide with the statewide annual

professional development meetings ofteachers' organizations. During thesedays, districts may conduct their own in-service activity or allow teachers toattend the statewide teacher meeting;however, the two days must be spent inprofessional development activities.


Compensation agreements are ne-gotiated at the local level. Most districtsprovide advancement on the salaryschedule based on years of teachingexperience and highest degree earned.In addition, some offer movement foradditional college credits and renewalunits. Tuition reimbursement is gener-ally not offered. There have been casesin larger districts in which teachers havereceived paid sabbaticals.


Each October, the Montana Educa-tion Association (MEA) and the Mon-tana Federation of Teachers (MFT) co-sponsor a two-day Educators' Confer-ence. The conference also involvesteacher subject-matter associationsthroughout the state. This event attracts3,500 participants and features morethan 500 workshops and presentationscovering a variety of subject-matter andpedagogical issues. Teachers may earnup to 15 renewal units if they fullyparticipate in the conference. Districtsare required to close schools on the twodays that the conference is scheduled,so that teachers will be able to attend atfull pay. The conference registration feemay be paid by teachers or their districts.

Montana State University (MSU)has maintained a partnership with theBozeman Public School District (BPSD)since 1991. The mission of the BPSD-MSU Partnership is to engage membersof this joint educational community in"collaborative work to improve educa-tion for students and increase profes-sional development opportunities andempowerment." Partnership activitiesare extensive, structured around eight

components: (1) a mentor program, forwhich MSU graduates work as interns inBPSD schools and are assigned mentorsduring their first year; (2) joint appoint-ments for teachers at MSU and BozemanHigh School; (3) field placements, inwhich MSU and district staff meet todiscuss internship issues and experi-ences; (4) research and scholarshipproducing joint publications by MSUand BPSD staff; (5) a magnet school withwhich MSU assists BPSD; (6) an earlychildhood education committee of MSUand BPSD staff who work with child careproviders on issues in early childhoodeducation; (7) individual partnershipsthat represent one-on-one collabora-tions between MSU and BPSD staff; and(8) in-service activities jointly sponsoredby MSU and BPSD. In 1992, partnershipactivities were extended to include threeother districts and the county superin-tendent.

Several Montana universities andcolleges have been involved in SIMMS.These partners include Montana StateUniversity, the University of Montana,and the Tribal Community Colleges.

In 1985, Montana's Wildlife ParksService joined the national Project WILDorganization. Montana's Project WILDwas originally staffed by the OPI sciencespecialist and 20 teachers who receivedtraining and were certified as ProjectWILD facilitators. Project WILD is astate-approved in-service provider andoffers training workshops upon requestto any district or school. The one-dayworkshop includes the WILD curriculumguide and hands-on techniques in itsapplication. Teachers may also registerfor week-long workshops offered duringthe summer. Over 500 teachers partici-pate in Project WILD workshops eachyear.


Peter DonovanExecutive OfficerCertification Standards and PracticesAdvisory Council2500 BroadwayHelena, MT 59620-0601406-444-6576

115

June AtkinsProfessional Development CoordinatorMontana Office of Public InstructionBox 202501Helena, MT 59620-2501406-444-3095

Eric FeaverPresidentMontana Education Association1232 East SixthHelena, MT 59601406-442-4250


The Montana Beginning Teacher Sup-port Program: Final Report prepared byDr. Lee Spuhler and Dr. Alan Zetler forthe Certification and Standards Practicesand Advisory Council, Montana StateBoard of Public Education (July 1995).

Implications of National Board Certifi-cation on the Development of MontanaEducators; Montana Steering Commit-tee on National Board Certification -CSPAC (July 1995).


for 1993.





S

NebraskaEducation Policy Context

Nebraska's K-12 public educationsystem is organized into 700school districts and 19 regional

service agencies. With a relatively smallpopulation dispersed over a largegeographic area, there has been a longhistory of local control over educationpolicy. For example, curriculum andgraduation requirements are set locally,and there are no statewide textbookadoption or assessment programs. TheNebraska Department of Education (re-ferred to hereafter as the state educationagency, or SEA) provides leadership toNebraska's schools in promoting qualitylearning, equity, and accountabilitythrough the High Performance LearningModel. Current issues of concern relateto setting priorities as schools facepotential financial constraints.

In September of 1995, a panel jointlyappointed by the commissioner ofeducation and the governor initiated thedevelopment of general educationalgoals and academic content standardsfor Nebraska students. During 1995-96, aseries of panel meetings, work commit-tees, and a statewide video conferencewere held to assist in developing thegoals and standards. A draft has beenadopted by the State Board of Education(SBE) for further discussion and refine-ment before the goals and standards areused in Nebraska schools. The SBE alsohas passed a resolution requiring that



the accreditation of schools incorporatehow well students are learning asdefined by the Nebraska Standards.Both school improvement and profes-sional development are tied to theaccreditation process.


Nebraska's education reform visionvalues professional development asbeing the cornerstone of school suc-cess. This vision was conceived byCommissioner of Education Christensenwhen he served as deputy commis-sioner, and it is synthesized in the 1992document, High Performance Learning:A Model for Redesigning Education forAll Nebraska Students. In this docu-ment, Dr. Christensen describes strate-gies for and assumptions about schoolimprovement that emphasize the need forinvestments in training and professionaldevelopment; he also calls for a commit-ment to providing the time needed "forindividuals to wrestle with and workthrough their attitudes, beliefs andvalues (and to change them) so thatbehavior ultimately changes."

Teacher Certification Policies.Rule 21 (92 NAC 21) regulates theteacher certification process. Enacted inAugust of 1995, this rule includesprovisions for teaching certificates,administrative certificates, temporaryteaching and administrative certificates,

special services counseling certificates,reciprocity, and the appeals procedure.Local districts may perform criminalbackground checks at their discretion.Fingerprinting is required by statute forout-of-state individuals applying fortheir first Nebraska certificate.

The first regular certificate grantedto a teacher is the Initial TeachingCertificate, which is valid for five years.Applicants must have completed anapproved teacher preparation programand satisfied the basic skills competencyrequirement by receiving a passing scoreon a competency test, satisfying aspecial education competency, andcompleting an approved human relationstraining competency.

The Standard Certificate is issuedupon completion of two successiveyears of teaching experience and isrenewable every seven years with sixsemester hours or two consecutive yearsof teaching experience. The ProfessionalTeaching Certificate requires the comple-tion of a graduate degree, which must bein the same area as the teacher'sundergraduate degree. The ProfessionalCertificate is renewable every ten yearswith six semester hours or one year ofteaching experience, except for thoseissued prior to July 11, 1977, which arevalid for the life of the holder.

Teachers may apply for tenure, or"permanent certification," at the begin-ning of their fourth year of teaching.Permanently certified staff must earn sixsemester hours of college credit for

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andexulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Institutem Educational Governance, Finance, Polity- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


116BEST COPY AVAILABLE

every six years of employment ordemonstrate evidence of professionalgrowth, as determined by the localboard. Evidence of professional growthmay include educational travel, profes-sional publications, or work on educa-tion committees. The local board hascomplete discretion over what consti-tutes professional growth and maydecide to accept only college credits tosatisfy this requirement.

State-Supported Programs. Profes-sional development is provided todistricts through direct training, organi-zation of networks and support groups,assistance in developing and implement-ing school improvement plans, andtechnical assistance as provided throughNebraska's 19 Educational Service Units(ESUs). The ESUs were created by thelegislature, serve specific geographicareas, and have the power to levyproperty taxes. Most are staffed by aprofessional development director, atechnology specialist, and other con-sultants who facilitate school improve-ment planning and provide training. TheSEA assists ESU staff in facilitating localschool improvement planning, identify-ing building-level training needs (basedon student achievement data), develop-ing target goals, implementing strategiesand training activities, and focusingdiscussions at the school level pertain-ing to instruction. In addition, theybroker and network information andresources to enable schools and districtsto receive the professional developmentassistance they require.

Nebraska's Education InnovationFund was established in 1993 throughproceeds generated by the state'slottery system. The Fund supports twotypes of grant programs that promoteinnovative educational piojects. Mini-grants provide resources to publicschool districts for the sole purpose ofdeveloping and revising their districtwidestrategic school improvement plan(SSIP). Major competitive grants areintended to encourage schools todevelop innovations in programs orpractices that result in the restructuringof school organization, management,and instructional programs. Grantproposals must be linked to needsidentified in the SSIP. In addition,

proposals must address one or more ofthe funding priorities that are set bystatute, and staff development is one ofthese priorities. SEA officials report thatthe Education Innovation Fund hasenabled an increase in staff developmenttraining in the state of Nebraska,particularly in the area of technology useand incorporation across the curriculum.Additional examples of staff develop-ment funded by the competitive grantsinclude funding for implementing newprimary curriculum, for the inclusion ofstudents with disabilities in the class-room, for dealing effectively with at-riskyouth, for improving math and scienceinstructional practices, and for mentoringfirst-year teachers.

The SEA houses an EducationTechnology Center that facilitates dis-tricts' efforts in planning and implement-ing their instructional technology plans.The Technology Center worked withESU staff development specialists toform the Internet Integration Partnership(HP), which is comprised of several workgroups that are creating training oppor-tunities and instructional resources forschool staff. Over 80 percent of all K-12educators have Internet accounts andhave received at least one day of trainingon the Internet. The initial Internetnetwork system was purchased jointlyby the SEA and the Nebraska Math andScience Initiative (see below). Technol-ogy Center services are supportedthrough state funds and a grant from theUS WEST Foundation.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Nebraska Math andScience Initiative (NMSI) is the state'sStatewide Systemic Initiative (SSI), whichis funded largely by a grant from theNational Science Foundation. NMSIprovides professional development op-portunities for teachers through itsPromoting Excellence in Education Re-gionally and Statewide (PEERS) Acad-emy. The Academy sponsors peer-ledworkshops and follow-up sessions forapproximately 1,000 teachers each sum-mer. Although the SSI grant expires in1997, estimates are that nearly 40 percentof all secondary-level math and scienceteachers and 17 percent of all elementaryteachers in Nebraska will have attendedthe PEERS Academy by September,1997.

117

Nebraska initiated a Goals 2000program in January of 1995. Accordingto federal guidelines, 90 percent of Goals2000 funds must be subgranted directlyto local education agencies (LEAs) or aconsortia of LEAs or ESUs for thepurpose of school improvement activi-ties. Among these activities, staffdevelopment and preservice educationare identified as top priorities. The SBEhas established reading and writinginstruction as the focus for 1996-97Goals 2000 subgrants. Over $1 millionwas awarded to LEAs and ESUs for theprofessional development of teachers inthese areas. Goals 2000 funds are alsobeing used to support the NebraskaPreK-12 Technology Plan, approved bythe SBE in the spring of 1996, which setsforth an agenda to "advance excellencein Nebraska's education systems throughthe coordinated use of technology" andcalls for the development of minimumtechnology competencies for teachers.A set of suggested minimum competen-cies are now in place for pre- and post-service teacher training.


State Funds. Three years after theinception of the Nebraska Lottery, over$23.4 million in education grants havebeen awarded, a portion of which hasbeen used to support staff development.The Nebraska legislature appropriated$13 million (LB 860) to establish a SchoolTechnology Fund to provide school-based technology grants and supportthe SEA' s Technology Center. Fundsfor Internet connections are awarded ona competitive basis to schools at the rateof $50 per teacher. The NebraskaDepartment of Energy has provided$500,000 to promote science and energyeducation through the PEERS Academyand through grants to individual teach-ers and communities.

Federal Funds. Nebraska received$567,422 in Goals 2000 monies in 1994,$1,986,104 in 1995, and $1,835,986 in1996. The state also received $1,132,388in Eisenhower funds in 1995; in 1996, itreceived $1,938,890 from the Title IV Safeand Drug Free Schools program and

$1,768,454 from Elementary and Second-ary Education Act (ESEA) Title VI-Innovative Education Program Strate-gies. Each of these grant sourcessupport programming for professionaldevelopment at the state and local levels.

Local Funds. Local districts, througha tax levy, provide the primary supportfor professional development in Ne-braska. Statewide, approximately $500,000per year has been collected since 1992 tosupport ESU technology-specific staffdevelopment services. Schools thatreceive Internet connection funds fromthe state are required to providematching support at $50 per teacher.


Nebraska encourages teacher pro-fessional development by requiring localschools districts to provide a minimum often hours of professional developmentper year. Typically, local school districtsdesign appropriate professional devel-opment activities to support schoolimprovement processes or initiativesunderway in the school or district.However, formal professional develop-ment plans and/or planning committeesare not required at the local level.

Because of the small size andisolated nature of many of Nebraska'sdistricts, professional development isoften provided with the assistance ofESU staff. There are minimal staterequirements for professional develop-ment; as a result, it is the responsibilityof administrators, teachers, other schoolstaff members, and local boards torecognize the need for additional trainingand information. Regional structureshelp coordinate activities and maximizelimited funds, but professional develop-ment designed for building level imple-mentation of instructional improvementis limited.


Nebraska does not have a state-funded tuition reimbursement program;however, such reimbursement may be

made available to teachers through localbargaining agreements or at the discre-tion of local districts.


The Nebraska State Education As-sociation (NSEA) hosts an annualSummer Leadership Conference. Theconference features an array of seminarsthat cover topics ranging from bestpractices for inclusion and multiculturaleducation to conflict management andmembership rights. During the schoolyear, NSEA staff and consultants areavailable to respond to technical assis-tance and training requests from dis-tricts.

The University of Nebraska-Lincoln(UNL) is collaborating with severalschool districts and individual schoolsto provide professional developmentopportunities for teachers. UNL'sTeachers College is working with fourpartner schools to identify effectiveways to prepare teachers to work intoday's schools and to explore ques-tions and problems of mutual interest tothe schools and the college. At RoperElementary School (Lincoln), TeachersCollege faculty work collaboratively onsite with school staff to design a set of"model" practicum experiences forteacher education students who areassigned to teaching teams at Roper.The partnership with Benson HighSchool (Omaha) focuses on developingan induction program to assist newteachers during their first and secondyears of teaching. The induction pro-cess begins at the student-teacher level.Staff at Southeast High School (Lincoln)have been working with TeachersCollege faculty to develop articulationstrategies from middle school throughhigh school and to equip students forthe transition to postsecondary studies.A fourth partnership is with MillardLefler Middle School (Lincoln), whereUNL faculty and school staff havedesigned practicum experiences formiddle-level teachers. The partnership isalso developing approaches to helpmiddle school students attain the more

118

advanced social skills that are importantto school success.

The UNL Department of SpecialEducation and Communication Disor-ders (SECD), in partnership with LincolnPublic Schools and Lancaster CountyHead Start, established a professionaldevelopment school (PDS) in 1993. UNLstudents representing disciplines suchas early childhood special education,nursing, music education, and consumerand family sciences work in classroomsat Barkley Memorial Center, whereapproximately half of the student popu-lation is identified as having disabilitiesranging from mild to severe. The PDSclassrooms are entirely inclusive; allphysical, occupational, and speech-language therapies are provided withinthe context of daily classroom routines.PDS partner organizations collaborativelysupervise UNL students. This partner-ship also spawned an Early ChildhoodSpecial Education (ECSE) and Head Startprogram at SECD. The program seeks todevelop collaborative programs for thedelivery of services to young children;to encourage interchange between fac-ulty and staff at the three programs,thereby fostering professional develop-ment at each site; to improve pre-professional programs in speech-lan-guage pathology and early childhoodspecial education; and to explore, inconjunction with the SECD, the possibil-ity of extending the program to other pre-professional programs.


Mary Ann LoshAdministratorStaff Development and InstructionalStrategiesNebraska Department of Education301 Centennial Mall SouthP.O. Box 94987Lincoln, NE 68509-4987402-471-4357

Robert CrosierAdministratorTeacher Certification OfficeNebraska Department of Education301 Cenntennial Mall SouthP.O. Box 94987Lincoln, NE 68509-4987402-471-2497

Jay SearsDirector of Instruction AdvocacyNebraska State Education Association605 South 14thLincoln, NE 68508402-475-7611






11 9


NevadaEducation Policy Context

Nevada, currently the fastestgrowing state in the nation,faces interesting challenges in

setting education policy. The state has17 counties, each with one schooldistrict. The number of students isincreasing swiftly, and new legislationcurtails rapid growth in class sizesamong certain elementary grades, com-pounding the need for more teachers andthe need to streamline the credentialingsystem to place teachers quickly inclassrooms. In 1995, the state legislatureallocated $245,000 to the Nevada Depart-ment of Education (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA)to automate some functions of the Officeof Teacher Licensure. The State'sCommission on Professional Standardsin Education (CPSE) is consideringadopting alternative routes to certifica-tion, and has approved reciprocal licenseagreements with other states.

The state Board of Education (SBE)is addressing three priority areas:examinination of proficiency-basedgraduation standards, which would havemajor implications for teacher classroomperformance; drop-out prevention andkindergarten for all students; and usingschool-to-work initiatives and Nevada'sGoals 2000 grant to drive systemicchange in the state. The SBE is alsodeveloping new assessments for stu-dents in grades 4, 8, and 11.



The SEA is being restructured intosix new divisions, or Leadership Teams,each having a key focus. Threedivisions relate to professional develop-ment: one Leadership Team focuses onstandards, curriculum, and assessment;another focuses on educational equity;and a third on human resources andteacher licensure.


Nevada does not have a statewideprofessional development plan for teach-ers. The CPSE was established in 1987 toprescribe licensure requirements for alleducation personnel.

The CPSE is a semi-autonomouscommission staffed by the SBE; theDeputy Superintendent of Public In-struction serves as the SEA liaision tothe Commission. The SBE can disap-prove any CPSE-adopted regulationwithin 90 days, but thus far the SBE hasnever vetoed a CPSE regulation.

Teacher Certification Policies. In-dividuals who successfully complete ateacher education program at an accred-ited university are eligible for an initialfive-year license. During this five-yearperiod, teachers must complete sixsemester hours of college coursework orthe equivalent in professional develop-ment credits, and must meet testingrequirements if they have not done so

previously. This license must berenewed every five years.

Professional Licenses are offered toeducators with three years of teachingexperience and a master's degree. TheProfessional License must be renewedevery six years. Renewal is contingentupon completion of six semester hours ofcollege coursework or the equivalent inprofessional development credits.

State-Supported Programs. Thereis no state plan for teacher professionaldevelopment in Nevada, and no stateoversight of local professional develop-ment activities. Some SEA divisionsoffer workshops and in-service pro-grams, upon request, or deliver informa-tion on specific state programs andinitiatives. The Office of TeacherLicensure manages the logistics andpaperwork of teacher certification andrenewal. The state is automating therecertification functions, and when thisprocess is complete, teacher licenses willbe maintained in a centralized computerdatabase. All schools in the state shouldbe able to access this information.

Nevada previously maintained astate system of professional develop-ment centers organized around thestate's 17 school districts. However, thissystem lost state funding during a periodof budget difficulties in 1991. TheDouglas and Clark Counties havemanaged to maintain their professionaldevelopment centers with their ownresources and outside funding.

'This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

1 20

The Education Coalition is a state-wide consortium of education-relatedgroups facilitated by the State Superin-tendent of Public Instruction. Theconsortium includes the Nevada Educa-tion Association, the Nevada SchoolBoards Association, the Nevada Admin-istrators Association, the PTA, amongothers. The Education Coalition meetsregularly throughout the legislativesession and has addressed the issue ofteacher professional development.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Nevada is a Goals 2000 stateand uses these funds to support localeducation reform, professional develop-ment for teachers, and preservice educa-tion. Goals 2000 funds also supportNevada's Comprehensive State Im-provement Plan, which addresses stan-dards and assessment for students andincludes a professional developmentcomponent.

School-to-work initiatives are help-ing to drive reform in the state.Businesses are encouraged to assistlocal school districts with professionaldevelopment activities.


State Funds. Although there is nostate income tax, state funds coverapproximately 60 percent of publiceducation costs. Federal funds consti-tute approximately 4 to 5 percent ofeducation funding, and local taxesprovide the balance. There is no line-item in the state education budget forteacher professional development activi-ties. A sum of $245,000 was allocated inthe 1995 legislative session to the SEA toautomate the functions of the Office ofTeacher Licensure during the 1995-97biennium. Also allocated was $4 millionfor school-to-work initiatives, includingsome support for professional develop-ment. The legislature allocated $5 millionto the University of Nevada to expanddistance learning and technology ef-forts.

Federal Funds. The state receivesEisenhower funds and Title I and Goals2000 grants that are distributed to localdistricts for professional development.

Nevada received $1,243,473 inEisenhower funds in FY 1995. In Year 2of Goals 2000, Nevada received$1,419,052, of which 90 percent wasdistributed to local school districts forreform efforts, including teacher profes-sional development. Second-year fund-ing from Goals 2000 also providedsubgrants to local districts. For example,in Year 1, the Clark County Schooldistrict (Nevada's largest district, whichincludes Las Vegas), the University ofNevada-Las Vegas, and the local profes-sional development center received$49,632 to improve and coordinate long-term professional development.

Federal tech-prep funds supportpartnerships between community col-leges and local districts in technologyeducation. These partnerships haveprofessional development componentsfor teachers.

Local Funds. The state does notmandate local budget set-asides for.professional development activities. Dis-tricts fund their own activities asresources allow, with amounts varyingwidely by district.


Although Nevada has no specificrequirements for teacher professionaldevelopment, districts are allowed touse up to three days each year fordistrict-sponsored, in-service activitiesapproved by the SEA. The three daysare part of the state's mandated 180-daycalendar. Districts usually use all threedays for professional development. AnSBE-appointed Task Force on Second-ary Education recommended that tendays be dedicated to professionaldevelopment each year, but the legisla-ture has not set aside funds for thispurpose.

Many districts have been involvedin the creation of professional develop-ment plans as part of the Goals 2000initiative. However, the implementationof these plans is not mandatory. Manydistricts have their own professionaldevelopment staff, and providedistrictwide training, regardless of the

121

presence or absence of state encourage-ment or federal programming. Theprimary providers of staff developmentservices at the district level are districtstaff, universities, and the SEA.


Teachers can negotiate for profes-sional development, such as sabbaticalsand release time to pursue courses andother activities, on the local level.

Teachers may receive salary incre-ments based upon the completion ofcollege coursework and other profes-sional development activities. Thesepolicies vary from district to district.


The Nevada Education Associationprovides professional development forteachers upon request, and its localchapters provide training for members.The Nevada Education Associationworks at the state level to help informpolicy, and is a member of the NevadaEducation Coalition.

Nevada's institutions of highereducation are a major source of profes-sional development for the state'steaching force. They provide in-serviceactivities and college coursework forteachers, and contribute to a uniquesystem of partnerships between commu-nity colleges and local districts. Commu-nity colleges receive federal tech-prepfunding to administer articulated tech-nology classes with high schools, andprovide funds for teachers to pursueprofessional development in technologyand other areas. Institutions of highereducation work closely with the SEA toprovide training as needed. The stateuniversity system is seeking fundingfrom the legislature to improve thetechnology needed to deliver profes-sional development to teachers in ruraland remote areas of the state.

Through the state's school-to-workinitiative, many businesses have begunto provide professional developmentopportunities for teachers of banking,

manufacturing, health services, andconstruction. Businesses have offeredsummer externship programs for teach-ers in their local school districts.


Doug StokerDirector of Teacher CertificationNevada Department of Education1850 East Saharra, Suite 207State Mail RoomLas Vegas, NV 89158702-486-6455

Christina HarperSecretaryNevada Commission on ProfessionalStandards in Education700 East 5th StreetCarson City, NV 89701-5096702-687-9226

Debbie CahillNevada Education Association1890 Donald St.Reno, NV 89502800-232-6732


for 1993.





1223

`PRE Teacher Professional Development Profile

New Hampshire


New Hampshire is a small statewith 176 school districts and 459schools enrolling 185,360 stu-

dents. State funds account for onlyapproximately 8 percent of public educa-tion costs in New Hampshire. Localrevenues support over 83 percent of thefunding, and the balance is provided bythe federal government (less than 3percent), tuition costs for students whotransfer from outside districts (approxi-mately 5 percent), and the sale of bonds.It is, therefore, difficult for the state toexercise direct authority over schools insuch a context of strong local controlover education policy.

In the early 1990s, property-poorschool districts filed a lawsuit allegingthat the state did not provide adequateeducation opportunities for their stu-dents. The state supreme court referredthe matter to a lower court for a fullhearing, which began in May of 1996.

Despite the lawsuit and strong localcontrol, New Hampshire is implementinga statewide education reform initiative.The New Hampshire Education Improve-ment and Assessment Program (NHEIAP)was established by the state legislaturein 1993, including new curriculum frame-works for grades K-12 in social studies,English, math, and science (which havebeen completed) and new standards-based student assessments. Since 1994,two rounds of testing have been



administered in grade 3, and one roundeach in grades 6 and 10. The newassessments follow from the curriculumframeworks and contain a mix of multiple-choice questions, open-ended ques-tions, and writing samples to evaluatestudents' knowledge and their ability toapply that knowledge. Student out-comes are classified as novice, basic,proficient, or advanced. The state haspublicly released the results of the newassessment, which are based on achieve-ment categories, not percentiles. Therehas been a great deal of public interest inthe results, and personnel at the NewHampshire Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) expect theresults will encourage districts to adoptthe new curriculum frameworks.

The SEA has posted a FrequentlyAsked Questions document on its homepage (http://www.state.nh.us/doe/education.html) describing the intendeduse of the new assessment program:

"The assessment is not designed tocompare students, schools, anddistricts. Instead, it is designed topromote local and statewide edu-cational accountability and toprovide data to drive long-termeducational improvement. The newprogram sets higher expectationsfor student academic achievementin New Hampshire, but it will taketime for schools to fully implement a

plan for curriculum and instructionto meet the challenging standardsidentified in the curriculum frame-works.

Assessment results from the firstthree or four years will be used bylocal schools and the state toidentify areas that need improve-ment and to aid in the design andimplementation of educational im-provement activities. Each year, asmore and more data on studentsperformance is collected, schoolswill be able to focus improvementplans where they are needed most.Starting with the fifth year ofresults, schools, districts, and thestate will use assessment data tochart the long-term impact ofeducational improvement efforts."


Although New Hampshire is atraditionally "local-control state" interms of education policy, there isdefinite movement at the state level toeffect systemic improvements in theschools. SEA assistance to localdistricts in implementing the NHEIAPconsists of: a continuing series ofworkshops and informational meetingsabout NHEIAP; technical assistance todistricts who request help in thedevelopment of local improvement plans

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


123

(District Educational Improvement Plans,or DEIPs); and providing "support andstaff development activities to helpschools incorporate the curriculum frame-works, understand the assessment re-sults, integrate test results with otherdata on student performance, and sharesuccessful instructional practices."

Staff development has been acontinuing focus in New Hampshirepublic education. The state eliminatedlife-time certification for educators in1974 and set professional developmentrequirements for maintaining teachingcredentials. The state requires districtsto establish staff development commit-tees to ensure that personnel planscomply with state recertification require-ments. The SEA has restructured itselfin keeping with the NHEIAP so thatschool improvement tasks, includingprofessional development and qualitycontrol, are united in one division toensure coordination at the state level.

Teacher Certification Policies. Af-ter completing an approved teacherpreparation program, new teachers aregranted a Beginning Educator Certificatefrom the SEA. There are no specialprofessional development or evaluationrequirements for new teachers in NewHampshire. The Beginning TeacherCertificate and the Experienced EducatorCertificate have the same professionaldevelopment renewal requirements. TheBeginning Educator Certificate is validfor three years, during which teachersmust complete 50 clock hours ofprofessional growth activities accordingto the following requirements: 20 hoursmust be spent in the endorsement area;five hours must be spent in character andcitizenship education; and five hoursmust be spent in professional skills,knowledge of learners and learning,school organization, or exploratory andinnovative activities. A draft rule underconsideration would require five hoursof educational technology and Internetuse. The SEA has established guide-lines to help educators determine whattypes of activities satisfy the require-ments.

2

After completion of these require-ments and three years of successfulteaching experience, educators aregranted an Experienced Educator Certifi-cate. The advanced certificate is alsovalid for three years and has identicalrequirements for professional develop-ment activities. This system has been ineffect since 1978.

State-Supported Programs. Twoadvisory boards work with the NewHampshire State Board of Education(SBE). The Professional StandardsBoard is appointed by the SBE to adviseon teacher credentialing, and includesrepresentatives of the SEA, classroomteachers, education specialists, highereducation, and community members.The Council for Teacher Educationmakes recommendations to the SBE onstandards for teacher education pro-grams.

The SEA is developing a system toprovide technical assistance in compre-hensive educational reform to localeducation agencies and institutions ofhigher learning. This collaborativesystem includes private providers andother public agencies. Currently, theSEA is focusing on assisting schooldistricts in the development of DEIPs,the district plans for implementing theNHEIAP at the local level.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. New Hampshire is notparticipating in Goals 2000.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state budget for professional devel-opment.

Federal Funds. Most of the fundingin the state for professional developmentis from federal sources, such as Chapter1 or Eisenhower grants. In FY 1995, NewHampshire received $1,243,473 in

Eisenhower funds. New Hampshire alsoreceived special education and voca-tional education money from the federalgovernment.

124

Local Funds. Local funds, varyinggreatly from district to district, arereported to be the next largest source ofsupport for professional development.


The SEA has encouraged districtsto develop local improvement plans. Thecontent of the plans is rooted in the 1993NHEIAP law, which encouraged eachlocal school district to develop schoolimprovement goals and comprehensiveplans to implement its goals, specifyingprograms, priorities, and concerns in-cluding professional development. Dis-tricts are encouraged, but not required,to submit their plans to the SEA forreview. The state goal is to assistdistricts in enhancing student academicperformance and achievement.

Districts are expected to report dataon professional development in theirConsolidated Applications, which theSEA began using as a basis for awardingfunds to districts in the 1996-97 schoolyear. This application will be used toaward funds from Titles I, II, IV, and VI ofthe Elementary and Secondary Educa-tion Act. Eventually, all funds will berequested through this process.

The SBE requires districts to estab-lish staff development committees; theSEA performs an on-site review of thecommittees every five years. Committeemembers are selected by local electionand are responsible for establishingdistrictwide plans for meeting the sixprofessional growth areas determined bythe SEA.


Teachers can bargain for profes-sional development locally, but not atthe state level. Teachers negotiate forfunding for professional developmentand for higher salaries tied to advanceddegree work.

District generally reimburse teach-ers for the costs of completing recertifi-cation requirements. When the stateoffers training sessions, it may provide asmall stipend to cover the costs ofsubstitute teachers and travel. Collegetuition reimbursement and salary incre-ments for professional developmentvary by district.


The National Education Associa-tion-New Hampshire chapter (NEA-NH)provides a significant portion of teacherprofessional development opportunitiesin the state. The NEA-NH offersworkshops throughout the school yearand hosts an instructional conventioneach October that includes approxi-mately 100 different workshops foreducators. The NEA-NH gives a state-level voice on professional developmentby supporting initiatives that wouldprovide training or sabbaticals. Thestate also has an American Federation ofTeachers affiliate that advocates profes-sional development for teachers.

Other teacher organizations provideprofessional development opportuni-ties. The New Hampshire ScienceTeachers Association organizes an

annual conference for its members,Tech-Prep Teachers Association, othersubject-matter organizations, and theNew Hampshire chapter of the Associa-tion for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment provide professional de-velopment for their members.

The state university system pro-vides professional development throughcollege coursework. Keene College andother private colleges maintain partner-ships with local schools and providetailored staff development services.

The Center for School Services atthe Center for Resource Management(CRM) is a private company in SouthHampton that specializes in training,organization, program development, re-search and evaluation. Considered to beone of the major resources for teacher

professional development in New Hamp-shire, CRM was awarded a grant from thestate legislature to work with schoolsplanning systemic improvements. Whenthe grant money was cut from the statebudget, CRM continued its work withlocal schools.


Joanne BakerAdministratorDivision of Education ImprovementNew Hampshire Department ofEducation101 Pleasant StreetConcord, NH 03301603-271-3870

Martha Cray-AndrewsCenter for School Services, CRM2 Highland RoadSouth Hampton, NH 03827-3607603-394-7040

Fred PlaceNew Hampshire Education Association103 North State St.Concord, NH 03301603-224-7751






125 3


New Jersey I


New Jersey's public educationsystem serves over 1.1 millionstudents in nearly 600 school

districts. It operates according to a long-held tradition of local control. Untilrecently, the state focused on schoolfinance, state assessment, technicalassistance, and accountability. A high-stakes accountability system, in placesince 1978, was based on skills perfor-mance and compliance with state regula-tions and included state intervention.The Monitoring. Law of 1991 directed theNew Jersey Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) to developstate performance standards and reviseits monitoring and accountability sys-tems in accord with the standards.

The Comprehensive Plan for Edu-cational Improvement and Financingwas issued by the SEA as an interimreport in February of 1995 and finalized inMay of 1996. The Plan provides theState Board of Education (SBE) responseto the July 1994, New Jersey SupremeCourt ruling which declared the state'sschool funding formula inequitable andunconstitutional and ordered the gov-ernment to close the spending gapbetween the poor "special needs"districts and the state's wealthiestdistricts by September of 1996. The Planwould define a "thorough and efficienteducation" through the development of



curriculum standards, and determine thefunding levels that guarantee a thoroughand efficient education in all schooldistricts.

The Strategic Plan for SystemicImprovement of Education in NewJersey, issued by the SEA in June of1995, identifies 11 goals for improvingstudent achievement: developing aneducational mission statement; develop-ing curriculum standards; safety; de-regulation; accountability; revising thestate monitoring system; revising poli-cies for professional development andcertification; increased resources forinstruction; public engagement; instruc-tional technology; and developing modelsystems.

In May of 1996, the SBE adoptedcore curriculum standards for languagearts/literacy, mathematics, science, so-cial studies, world languages, health/physical education, and visual/perform-ing arts. The standards serve asframeworks for what students are ex-pected to know and be able to do at theend of the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades.Districts are not required to align theircurricula to the standards. However,state assessments (a proposed 4th-grade test, an 8th-grade Early WarningTest, and the 11th-grade High SchoolProficiency Test) will be redesigned andlinked to the standards. Studentperformance on these assessments willbe the primary criteria for determiningrewards or sanctions under the pro-posed accountability system.


Although the state has traditionallyhad limited involvement in settingstandards or guidelines for professionaldevelopment, professional developmentand certification is one of the goals in theStrategic Plan. Policy revisions affectingthe preparation and certification of newteachers have yielded great improve-ment, according to the SEA plan, but"the state has not paid comparableattention to the continuing professionaldevelopment of practicing teachers."

In July of 1993, the SBE formed aProfessional Development Committee,which recommended that the SEA adopta "required professional developmentplan for all New Jersey certificatedschool personnel measured in hours andexcluding a grandfather clause." Thegoal is providing quality professionaldevelopment opportunities focused onimproving student achievement of cur-riculum standards. The plan is expectedto be submitted to the SBE during the1996-97 school year.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheSEA Office of Professional Developmentand Licensing is responsible for thepolicies, programs, and services thatgovern the preparation, licensure, andprofessional development of publicschool personnel. The Office coordi-nates all licensing activities and moni-tors local professional development for

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

12.6

the purposes of licensure. The Officeconducts research on staff supply,demand, quality, and related issues. TheOffice is funded by revenues generatedby licensure and training fees.

Upon meeting all preservice require-ments and receiving a contract ofemployment, beginning teachers areissued a one-year Provisional Certificate.Since 1992, new teachers have beenrequired to participate in a one-yearinduction program that provides train-ing, support, and supervision by aprofessional support team. The induc-tion program includes formal evaluations(by the principal), classroom observa-tions, teacher feedback conferences, andcoaching. A positive end-of-yearrecommendation from the principal per-mits the teacher to advance to theStandard License, which is valid for life.Teachers with Standard Licenses mustparticipate in an annual evaluationprocess that includes preparing anindividual professional developmentplan.

The New Jersey School BoardsAssociation (NJSBA) has proposed arecertification system requiring teachersto complete 180 clock hours of profes-sional development activity every fiveyears to renew their standard certifi-cates. NJSBA recommends that anoptional Master Teacher Certificate beinstituted. The New Jersey EducationAssociation (NJEA) is opposed torecertification and recommends insteadthat teachers be required to obtain amaster's degree as part of their preservicepreparation in order to receive apermanent certificate. The Governor hasexpressed interest in revising the certifi-cation code. The SEA has beenexploring recertification and will makerecommendations to the SBE.

State-Supported Programs. In1978, the New Jersey legislature createda network of four regional EducationImprovement Centers (EICs) to providetraining and technical assistance todistricts. Each EIC was governed by alocal board representing administrators,teachers, school board members, andparents. The EIC structure was modifiedin 1982: one EIC (South Jersey) became aseparate entity with its own board andsupported by a variety of funding

2

sources; the other EICs became part of anew delivery system to provide assis-tance on major state initiatives.

The new system, instituted in 1983,consists of Regional Curriculum ServiceUnits (RCSUs) directly administered bythe state. At the same time, the SEAcreated the Academy for the Advance-ment of Teaching and Management(AATM). In 1990, the RCSUs and theAATM were merged into the Academyfor Professional Development, whichhas three regional centers (AcademiesNorth, Central, and South). Managed bythe SEA Division of Field Services, theacademies "deliver professional devel-opment services to accomplish SEAinitiatives; build local capacity forschool improvement and professionaldevelopment; provide effective trainingin various content areas; broker servicesfor specialized needs; and stay in thevanguard of educational thought andpractice."

The Academy publishes an annualbrochure of teacher training services.Districts may register for individualtraining activities or choose to enroll inthe Academy's Affiliate Program, whichentitles them to a variety of staffdevelopment services. Budget cutbackshave forced the centers to share a teamof mathematics and language artscurriculum specialists. A fundingproposal has been recently submitted tothe legislature, requesting nine addi-tional professional staff positions for theAcademy.

The SEA Office of InnovativePrograms created a clearinghouse onbest practices to assist school districts,teachers, and parents in obtaininginformation on programs and practicesthat promote high student achievement.

Federal - or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. New Jersey has incorporatedGoals 2000 into its Strategic Plan. Nearly90 percent of the Goals 2000 funds aredispersed at the local level throughcompetitive subgrants. One subgrantarea focuses on developing and enhanc-ing partnerships between colleges anddistricts to "assist in the academicpreparation of teacher candidates andsupport the training needs of current andprospective teachers."

The New Jersey Statewide SystemicInitiative (NJ SSI), entitled "AchievingExcellence in Mathematics, Science andTechnology Education," is a partnershipamong the SEA, elementary and second-ary schools, Rutgers University, andother state resources. Partnershipactivities are organized into two programcomponents. Thrust One consists of 13partnerships between elementary schoolsystems and institutions of highereducation. Approximately 200 K-8teachers each year receive training tostrengthen their instructional skills inmathematics, science, and technology.Thrust Two involves 33 districts insystemic reform activities that focus onthe teaching of science, mathematics,and technology. Activities are closelylinked to the state's core curriculumstandards. Initiated in 1993, NJ SSIactivities are funded through a five-yearNational Science Foundation grant ($2million annually), with supplementalsupport from the state ($1 million),federal Eisenhower funds ($1.8 million),and the Merck Institute for ScienceEducation.

The Geraldine R. Dodge Foundationsponsors the Summer Opportunity forTeachers program, initiated in 1985,which provides competitive mini-grantsfor teacher travel and other independentstudy activities conducted during thesummer. To date, the Foundation hascommitted $1.5 million to this initiative,which has awarded grants to over 300New Jersey teachers.

The Geraldine R. Dodge Foundationalso funds the Dodge Fellowship pro-gram, administered through the SEA.This program provides competitive grantsto outstanding alternate-route teachersto fund the costs of professional trainingand formal instruction during their firstyear of teaching.


State Funds. In 1995-96, the stateappropriated $1 million to support theAcademy for Professional Developmentregional centers. Funding for the Officeof Professional Development is gener-ated entirely through certification and

training fees. Districts do not receivestate aid specifically earmarked forprofessional development. However,the SEA Comprehensive Plan identifiesprofessional development as an essen-tial "associated cost" and recommendsthat districts adopt the private industrystandard (2 percent of salaries) andbudget one substitute day per teachingposition.

The majority of the operating funds(80 percent) for the Educational Informa-tion and Resource Center come fromfederal and foundation grants. It alsoreceives an annual state appropriation of$450,000.

Federal Funds. New Jersey receivedan $8.7-million Year 2 Goals 2000 grantand a $6-million Eisenhower grant in1995-96. These two federal programssupport the Academy for ProfessionalDevelopment and are the primary fund-ing sources for local staff development.

Local Funds. Local budget expendi-tures for professional development arediscretionary and vary by district.


The SEA requires districts to de-velop and implement a multi-year profes-sional development plan; however, theyare not mandated to budget for thisactivity. The law stipulates that the planshould be based on teaching staff needs,linked to student performance, inte-grated with curriculum development, andevaluated. As of the 1993-94 year, alldistricts are required to develop andimplement an induction-year programthat guarantees every provisional teachertraining, mentoring support, and super-vision to help meet the qualifications forpermanent licensure. The SEA issuesguidelines but does not provide funds tosupport these local programs.

The state does not set a minimumnumber of in-service days for districts.Most districts provide two in-servicedays per year, and two additional days toaccommodate teachers who want toattend the annual NJEA convention.


Professional development opportu-nities are negotiated at the district levelthrough collective bargaining agree-ments. Teachers advance on negotiatedsalary scales, based on the accumulationof college or in-service credits. Manydistricts award or acknowledge in-service credit based on clock hours.Every 15 clock hours is the equivalent ofone college credit; 15 college credits aretypically needed to advance on thesalary scale. Most districts providesome level of tuition reimbursement forteachers.

The Strategic Plan criticizes thecurrent incentive system for profes-sional development because it "empha-sizes the quantitative accumulation ofcollege and inservice credits" to ad-vance on negotiated salary scales. Theplan proposes that incentives be as-signed based on improved studentperformance related to the standards.


NJEA spends $4.7 million annuallyon its professional development pro-grams. Each November, the NJEAsponsors a two-day conference thatattracts 40,000 teachers to the work-shops offered by NJEA and affiliatedsubject-matter organizations. NJEAconducts between 12 and 14 single-theme professional development confer-ences throughout the year. In 1981, theNJEA created the Professional Develop-ment Institute, which maintains a regis-try of quality professional developmentproviders, endorses programs, docu-ments teacher participation, showcasesoutstanding programs, and assists dis-tricts in surveying teacher needs andinterests in professional development.NJEA is planning to expand its profes-sional development program by usingpart-time training consultants and teach-ers with expertise in selected instruc-tional areas.

123

The Educational and InformationResource Center (EIRC) was created in1967 by a group of educators in southernNew Jersey. EIRC initially focused ongrant-writing assistance to districts butquickly expanded to provide technicalassistance in response to district re-quests. EIRC' s statewide servicesinclude school improvement planning,curriculum development, staff develop-ment, teacher exchange programs, grant-writing assistance, the National Diffu-sion Network, and the New JerseyGeographic Alliance. More than 250,000teachers, administrators, students, andparents participate in EIRC activitiesannually. EIRC became a state agency in1978 and still receives some statesupport.

The Merck Institute for ScienceEducation (MISE) was founded in 1993to enhance student knowledge andinterest in science and science-relatedcareers by using inquiry-centered sci-ence and mathematics curricula andinstructional technology. MISE isconducting Leader Teacher Institutesfor teachers in three New Jersey districts,training teams of teachers in the contentknowledge and skills needed to trans-form teaching and learning.

Rutgers University established theConsortium for Educational Equity in1975 to assist schools with implementingreforms to promote the full achievementof all students. The Consortium usesprofessional development to target theeffects of gender, race, national origin,language, culture, socioeconomic sta-tus, and disability. The Consortium alsomanages the Center for Family Involve-ment in Schools, which provides schoolstaff with model programs and training inhow to actively involve parents in theirchildren's learning. The Center hasdeveloped programs that have reachedover 650 schools, 1,400 teachers, and30,000 families statewide.

Montclair State University (MSU)sponsors a professional developmentschool initiative in collaboration with theNJEA and the National EducationAssociation. The Clinical SchoolsNetwork was initiated in 1987 in re-sponse to MSU participation in the JohnGood lad Project. The Network pairseducation students with classroom

3

teachers to promote collegial discourseand application of critical thinking skills.Participating classroom teachers make athree-year commitment to serve as"clinical adjunct faculty" at the collegeand to attend workshops throughout theyear while serving as mentors forstudent teachers. Fifteen districts areinvolved in the network; a total of 170teachers have participated.

In 1992, the School of Education atRowan State University established aProfessional Development School (PDS)partnership with Cooper's Poynt El-ementary School in Camden, placingeducation students in classrooms andgiving Cooper's Poynt teachers oppor-tunities to conduct classroom researchwith Rowan faculty. Two additionalPDSs have been developed subse-quently at Woodrow Wilson HighSchool in Camden and Evergreen El-ementary School in Woodbury. RowanState University houses the Thomas E.Robinson Beginning Teachers Induc-tion Center (BTIC), which opened in1988. The Center provides supportservices to beginning teachers viaseminars, workshops, clinics, and otheractivities. BTIC provides technicalassistance and mentor training to sur-rounding school districts. The Centerhas served over 1,800 beginning teach-ers and trained 400 mentor teachers frompublic and private schools in southernNew Jersey.

The Institute for Arts & HumanitiesEducation (IAHE) was established in1982 as the Arts Foundation of NewJersey. This non-profit organizationfosters arts and humanities educationthrough programming such asINTERARTSTM and Teacher Institutes.INTERARTS provides training in inter-disciplinary techniques to school per-sonnel. INTERARTISTS conduct on-site staff development, in-service ses-sions and residencies during the schoolyear. IAHE' s summer Teacher Institutesprovide training in interdisciplinarycurriculum models that center on ahistorical theme and include the arts asan integral curriculum component.Teacher Institutes are taught by afaculty of distinguished college anduniversity professors from around thecountry and abroad. Participating

teachers are awarded $1,000 fellowships,attend follow-up seminars during theschool-year, and often continue to worktogether through regional AcademicAlliances.


Ida GrahamDirector, Professional Development andLicensingNew Jersey Department of EducationCN 500Trenton, NJ 08625609-984-1216

Academy for Professional DevelopmentAcademy NorthRobert Ozak, Director201-266-8660Academy CenterDolores Keezer,Director- 908-225-4545Academy SouthArthur Spangenberg,Director - 609-468-5530

Peg LawlorAssociate Director for Instruction andTrainingNew Jersey Education Association180 W. State StreetTrenton, NJ 08607609-599-4561

Ron ZuccaAssociate DirectorEducational Information and ResourceCenter606 Delsea DriveSewell, NJ 08080609-582-7000

Rebecca L. LubetkinExecutive DirectorConsortium for Educational EquityRutgers UniversityBuilding 4090 - Livingston CampusNew Brunswick, NJ 08903908-445-2071


for 1993.



Copies of the teacher professionaldevelopment profiles are available onCPU's home page at:


0 A 4 II...,

New MexicoEducation Policy Context

New Mexico's K-12 publiceducation system serves aculturally, geographically, and

economically diverse student popula-tion, approximately one-third of whomattend school in the Albuquerquedistrict. The remaining 88 schooldistricts are located in smaller, ruralcommunities in which local control overeducation policy has been maintained.For several years, the State Board ofEducation (SBE) has been establishinghigh expectations for students in NewMexico, and the Public Reform Act of1986 represented the New Mexicolegislature's attempt to establish aneducational vision. The reform wascomprehensive in nature, addressingissues such as class size, leadershiproles for teachers, licensure require-ments, attendance and graduation re-quirements, expanded testing, and learn-ing competencies. Several initiativeshave followed, all of which value theintegrity of collaboration, while main-taining a commitment to local planning.

The New Mexico State Departmentof Education (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) ap-pointed committees to identify educa-tion standards for New Mexico schoolsand to develop frameworks for exitcompetencies for 12th-grade students,which were adopted in 1992 as compo-nents of the Education Standards for



New Mexico Schools Standards forExcellence. Writing committees com-posed of teachers, administrators, col-lege faculty, parents, and others havedrafted half of a set of state contentstandards, with benchmarks at grades K-4, 5-8, and 9-12. Once adopted by theSBE, local districts and schools will berequired to align locally developedcurricula with the content standards.

A new school accreditation processdesigned to support the district'sEducational Plan for Student Success(EPSS) is in effect. The SEA isdeveloping a technical assistance docu-ment to facilitate teachers' understand-ing and application of the standards.Professional development activities arebeing planned to enhance the under-standing and teaching of the contentstandards. The activities will be offeredto teachers, administrators, local schoolboard members, and parents.

Consolidating Initiatives forTomorrow's Education (CITE) repre-sents a student-centered policy frame-work for promoting student learning tomeet state standards. Revised by theSBE in 1993, CITE links federal, state, andlocal education system priorities undereight central goals: (1) assuming sharedresponsibility for education; (2) provid-ing learning opportunities to all stu-dents; (3) setting high standards for allstudents; (4) offering teacher profes-sional development and recognition; (5)providing adequate and equitable fund-

ing; (6) establishing student-centeredlearning environments; (7) increasinglocal decision making; and (8) requiringperformance accountability. State poli-cies to support local school improve-ment continue to be refined, as evi-denced by the New Mexico EducationState Improvement Plan (adopted in1995) and recent legislation regardingcharter schools, education technology,and work readiness. On June 12, 1996,the legislature and Governor Gary E.Johnson appointed a 30-member PublicEducation Strategic Planning Teamcomprised of leaders representing edu-cation, business, community, and gov-ernmentand charged them with devel-oping a "statewide strategic plan forNew Mexico public schools." The Teamwill issue its first report to the SBE beforethe onset of the 1997 legislative session.


Legislative committees, as well asSBE-appointed panels, have researchedand proposed new policies to supportthe professional growth of New Mexico' seducators. The Legislative EducationStudy Committee (LESC) was formed in1965 to study education policies andschool finance issues for the state. Forthe past five years, the LESC hasreviewed New Mexico's policies andpractices regarding teacher professionaldevelopment and has led state efforts to

'This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

130

institute a Professional DevelopmentAct that would mandate districts todesign and submit an annual profes-sional development plan to the SBE andprovide state funding for local plans.First introduced in 1994, the proposedlegislation included a state allocation forsite-level planning (see "Public Fund-ing" below).

Other state-level groups have yieldedrecommendations that mirror LESC'sposition. The Systemic Change in Ed-ucation Advisory Committee (SCEAC)was created by the Governor and theSBE in 1993 to converge the variousstrands of New Mexico's educationreform initiatives into a comprehensiveeducation improvement plan. SCEACissued a report in 1994 which recom-mended that state set-aside funds beallocated to support district-level profes-sional development planning and imple-mentation. Similarly, an SBE-appointed,19-member Blue Ribbon Panel on Profes-sional Development examined profes-sional development opportunities avail-able to New Mexico public schooleducators, reviewed the relevant re-search, and provided recommendations.Based largely on teacher and administra-tor survey data and other nationalresearch information compiled bySCEAC, the panel issued a report inSeptember of 1994, entitled Criteria forProfessional Development in Schools.The report emphasized the need forongoing professional development thatis directly linked to school reform andfinancially supported at every level ofthe education system. Despite thecomplementary nature of the recommen-dations and the consensus of actionemerging from them, New Mexico has yetto fund a systemic initiative that wouldsupport district activity in this area.

Teacher Certification Policies. The19-member Professional StandardsCommission is appointed by the SBE andserves an advisory role on mattersrelated to teacher licensure andrelicensure, approval of preparatoryprograms, and professional conduct andethics. The Commission is composed offive classroom teachers, two schooladministrators, four community/busi-ness representatives, the state directorof licensure, a designee for the state

superintendent, and a representativefrom each of the following categories:special service personnel, non-teachingschool personnel, college faculty, acollege of education dean, and technicalcollege and private school personnel. In1989, the SBE adopted the Commission'sproposal to establish educator compe-tencies and restructure New Mexico'steacher licensing policies into a three-tier, performance-based system thataligns certification renewal with thedemonstrated achievement of thesecompetencies.

After meeting all preservice require-ments, entry-level teachers are issued aprovisional Level I license. The Level Ilicense is non-renewable and valid forthree years. Teachers may advance to aLevel II license after one year, if theypass a performance evaluation (seebelow). Since 1989, Level I teachers haveparticipated in a New Educator SupportProgram that provides non-evaluativementoring, and districts are required toimplement this program. Mentors, whomust be at least Level II certified or be acollege faculty member, receive trainingfrom the district before serving in asupport capacity. Implementation struc-tures for new teacher support programsare determined at the local level. TheSEA issues program and mentor trainingguidelines, but state funds are notallocated specifically for this activity.

The Level II license is valid for nineyears and may be renewed uponsatisfactory completion of the perfor-mance evaluation. Level HI-A is anoptional, nine-year license that isawarded to teachers who obtain amaster's degree and satisfy the require-ments of the performance evaluation.

Educator competencies have beenestablished and performance evalua-tions are required for all certified schoolpersonnel. Districts are required todesign a teacher performance evaluationprogram that measures "essential teach-ing competencies" in nine skill areas: (1)content knowledge; (2) teaching meth-ods; (3) communication; (4) principles oflearning; (5) student assessment; (6)classroom management; (7) diversityawareness; (8) reflection and modifica-tion; and (9) collegiality. Competencyindicators vary according to licensure

1 Of)

level, with Level III-A competenciesdenoting more advanced teaching andprofessional skills. Performance evalua-tion plans are designed locally (inadherence with state guidelines) andmust be approved by the SEA. Theevaluation consists of personnel orien-tation and training in performanceevaluation techniques, classroom obser-vations, pre- and post-observation con-ferences, and other forms of datacollection.

The evaluation is intended forformative and summative use. On aformative level, teachers receive feed-back at various points during the yearthat is used to implement and refine theirindividualized professional developmentplans (PDP). The PDP is developed bythe teacher in consultation with theevaluator and is updated yearly. Thedistrict must assist teachers in carryingout their PDPs by providing guidance,workshops, classes, or other resourcesas needed. The evaluation is summativein that results are used to determinelicensure upgrades and renewal, as wellas continued employment.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA School Program and ProfessionalDevelopment Unit provides technicalassistance to local districts. Staff fromthis office are organized into two-member teams to work in particularregions of the state. These teams areable to respond to assistance requests inthe areas of curriculum development,assessment and evaluation, licensurepolicies, and compliance regulations,among others.

The SEA operates ongoing state-wide training programs for teachers.Held each summer, the LeadershipInstitute offers three-day workshopsfocusing on various pedagogical topicsor "strands" of interest. The Institutewas created in 1984 to provide trainingfor teachers and administrators insupervision and evaluation, based onthe components of the state plan. Sincethen, Institute activities have beenexpanded to serve district administra-tors, school board members, and par-ents. Institute topics cover a variety ofinterests (e.g., education technology,implementing standards for excellence,and multiple intelligences) and are

designed to reinforce New Mexico'steacher and administrator competencies.The workshops are estimated to attractover 300 participants per year.

The SEA also administers "specialprojects" in professional development,such as the New Mexico Law RelatedEducation Project (NML-RE), Mediationin the Schools, and the Indian EducationCenter for Excellence. Each projectprovides ongoing opportunities forteacher training and professional growth.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Using federal Goals 2000funds, the SEA offers competitiveprofessional development grants toconsortia and individual districts. Dur-ing the 1994-95 school year, two districtconsortia received grants.

The Systemic Initiative in Math andScience Education (SIMSE) was createdin 1991 through a $10-million StatewideSystemic Initiative (SSI) grant from theNational Science Foundation andthrough supplemental federal Eisen-hower funds. SIMSE activities are basedin five regional centers. Participatingteachers attend SIMSE summer insti-tutes and receive technical assistancethroughout the year from regional centerstaff. Over 120 schools (representing780 trained teachers) are implementingnew and innovative mathematics andscience curricula based 'on the SIMSEmodel.

New Mexico participates in thenational Re:Learning program and hascreated a strategic planning process,entitled ShadesofChange, to implementthe Re:Learning principles of effectiveschooling. Re:Learning New Mexicoprovides technical assistance to schools,districts, and communities that areengaged in needs assessment andstrategic planning. The process focuseson five indicators of change: (1) teach-ing and learning; (2) leadership; (3)school-community partnerships; (4) mul-tilevel support systems; and (5) commu-nication. In 1995-96, 126 schoolsrepresenting 29 districts participated inRe:Learning; in 1996-97, the numberincreased to 139 schools representing 23districts. Participation in Shades ofChange activities can be used to satisfythe state's new accreditation require-ments (see below). Re:Learning New

Mexico activities are funded through astate appropriation and a grant from theNoyce Foundation.

Rockefeller Foundation grants arebeing used to sponsor two majorprofessional development projects. TheNew Mexico Academy for SchoolLeaders provides training that promotesthe role of teachers as leaders of andcontributors to educational renewalefforts. New Mexico's largest district,Albuquerque Public Schools, is one of aselect group of districts in the country toreceive a Rockefeller Foundation profes-sional development grant.


State Funds. There is no line item forprofessional development in the existingstate education budget. However, theLESC study estimated that, in the 1995-96 school year, $2.4 million in state funds(as assigned through special projectsand district operational budgets) wasused for teacher professional develop-ment at the state and local levels. Thisfigure accounts for approximately .02percent of the state's total educationbudget. Re:Learning New Mexico isfunded through a special state appro-priation, which totaled $900,000 in1995-96 and $800,000 in 1996-97.

The proposed Professional Devel-opment Improvement Act would haveprovided a $4.5-million state appropria-tion for district-level professional devel-opment programs. In 1995, the legisla-ture partially funded the bill, approving a$445,000 appropriation that would pro-vide time and resources for districts tocreate a professional development plan.However, this amendment was latervetoed by the Governor because fund-ing was not available within the existingschool finance formula. A similar bill,proposed during the 1996 legislativesession was also vetoed by the Gover-nor.

Federal Funds. New Mexico re-ceived a $2.7-million Goals 2000 grantfor 1995-96. Approximately 90 percent ofthese funds was allocated to localdistricts through competitive grants forthe areas of school improvement, profes-

1 3 2

sional development, and preservicetraining. Federal Eisenhower funds forthe 1995-96 year totaled $1.9 million andwere used for professional developmentin mathematics and science.

Local Funds. The SBE grantsschools the authority to assign moniesfrom other operational funding strands(e.g., Title I, special education, and state-supported special projects) for profes-sional development activities. There areno restrictions or mandatory require-ments placed on districts in this regard.A 1995 LESC survey of superintendentsrevealed that federal ($4 million state-wide) and state-supported ($2.4 millionstatewide) special projects accountedfor 78 percent of all funds used fordistrict-sponsored professional devel-opment.


Under the new accreditation pro-cess, each district is required to developan EPSS. Districts are encouraged tofocus all professional development onattaining the goals of their EPSSs.Districts have responsibility for assist-ing all certified personnel in implement-ing their individual PDPs. The SEA hascreated a professional developmentplanning guide that districts may use asa reference source.

In 1994, the SEA distributed asurvey to a randomly selected group ofteachers and school administrators andall superintendents. One year later, anLESC survey yielded responses from 65New Mexico school districts (represent-ing 73 percent of all districts). Both sur-veys included questions about localprofessional development activities. Over70 percent of respondents to the SEAsurvey identified a lack of time, while 58percent cited a lack of money, as beingfactors that inhibit professional develop-ment. LESC's survey determined thatdistricts allocate from one to as many as12 days for in-service activities duringthe school year, with an average of 3.7days across all districts. Since 1987(when three in-service days were elimi-nated from the state school year

calendar), districts have had to negotiatelocally for additional time by extendingthe school day and/or the contract year.The most frequently cited topics fordistrict-sponsored, in-service activitiesare technology, pedagogy and class-room management, child/substanceabuse, and special education and inclu-sion.


Teacher salary incentives for con-tinued graduate education and othertypes of professional development aredetermined at the local level. Since 1974,the state has used an Instructional StaffTraining and Experience (T&E) Index toallocate funds for teacher salary supple-ments (although districts are not re-quired to used the money for thispurpose). By statute, the T&E Index iscalculated based on the weightedaverage of a district employee's recog-nized years of teaching experience andlevel of academic training: bachelor'splus 15 credits, bachelor's plus 45credits, master's, master's plus 15

credits, master's plus 45 credits, or post-master's degree. Each district receivesan allocation based on HE estimates.


In 1990, the Commission on HigherEducation (CHE) established a policythat would fund "extended services"instruction to encourage New Mexico'scolleges and universities to provide off -campus instructional activities. LESC' ssurvey data revealed that an overwhelm-ing number of districts identified dis-tance learning services offered throughNew Mexico institutions of highereducation and other organizations as asource of professional development.


Paula Sass DonnellyDirector of School Programs and Profes-sional DevelopmentNew Mexico State Department ofEducationEducation Building - Capitol ComplexSanta Fe, NM 87501505-827-6572

Pauline RindoneDeputy DirectorLegislative Education Study CommitteeState Capitol, Room 418Santa Fe, NM 87503505-986-4591

Marilyn ScargallDirector of Professional LicensureNew Mexico State Department ofEducationEducation Building - Capitol ComplexSanta Fe, NM 87501505-287-6581


"Professional Development in the PublicSchools." Report issued by theLegislative Education Study Committee(October 1995).

Criteria for Professional Developmentin Schools: Recommendations of theNew Mexico Blue Ribbon Panel onProfessional Development. New MexicoState Board of Education (1994).

New Mexico Professional DevelopmentSchool/District Planning Guide. NewMexico State Department of Education(Winter 1994 - Draft).

Performance Evaluation Plan for Li-censed Personnel: A Technical Assis-tance Manual. New Mexico StateDepartment of Education (Winter 1994).


for 1993.





0

New YorkEducation Policy Context

New York's 714 schooldistricts serve approximately 2.7million students. The state's

large size and its emphasis on localcontrol have made education an osten-sible "fourth branch of government."Education policy is set primarily by theNew York Board of Regents (the StateBoard of Education, or SBE) and theCommissioner of Education. A newCommissioner of Education, appointedin 1995, launched several new initiatives,including transformation of the statestudent assessment system from aminimum competency test to a rigorousexamination. The New York StateEducation Department (referred to here-after as the state education agency, orSEA) is revising its curriculum frame-works: the resulting "Learning Stan-dards" were adopted by the SBE in Julyof 1996.

The New Compact for Learning, aninitiative of the previous Commissioner,was adopted by the SBE in 1991, and isstill operative in New York State. TheNew Compact established goals for allstudents in the state and set forth astrategy for meeting these goals.

The state allows teachers up to fiveschool days for professional develop-ment. An additional calendar day wasallotted to districts for professionaldevelopment activities specific to theNew Compact for Learning. The state



also supports a large network of TeacherResource and Computer Training Cen-ters that serve the professional develop-ment needs of many teachers andadministrators.

In 1993, the state amended certifica-tion regulations to require satisfactoryperformance by elementary teachers(grades pre-K through 6) of the commonbranch subjects and secondary teachers(grades 7 through 12) of the academicsubjects on the newly developed NewYork State Teacher Certification Exami-nations. This teacher assessmentprogram has four major components: theLiberal Arts and Sciences Test (LAST);the Assessment of Teaching Skills-Written (ATS-W); the Content SpecialtyTests (CSTs); and the Assessment ofTeaching Skills-Performance (ATS-P).


There is currently no statewide planfor professional development in NewYork. However, professional develop-ment is part of the discussions about thenew curriculum frameworks and studentassessment initiatives. The State TeacherEducation Certification and PracticeBoard, including representatives ofpublic school teachers, teacher educa-tors, and the broader educational com-munity, is involved in professionaldevelopment. The Board serves in anadvisory capacity to the SBE on teacher

licensing, program approval, and teacherpractice. The Board recently maderecommendations regarding teachingassessments, revising teacher licensurestandards, implementing and fundingTeacher Resource and Computer Train-ing Centers, and researching the perfor-mance of educators certified throughapproved programs.

The Office of Elementary, Middle,Secondary, and Continuing Education(EMSC) has outlined professional devel-opment activities that support localcapacity-building for raising studentstandards. An EMSC staff memberworks with the Teacher Centers. TheEMSC action priorities for the 1995-96school year (listed on the SEA Webpage, which contains information re-garding education initiatives), include:

conduct workshops and providefield information on curriculumframeworks and assessments, in-cluding prospective timelines forimplementation (ongoing);

expand the number of SchoolQuality Reviews and self-reviewsand train reviewers to participate inself-reviews (ongoing);

coordinate staff development op-portunities for teachers on curricu-lum frameworks, instructional tech-nology, school safety, school -to-

'This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polity Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

134

work transition, Goals 2000, SchoolQuality Reviews, and similar educa-tional reform initiatives (ongoing);

collaborate with the SEA Office ofHigher Education and the Profes-sions on teacher preparation re-quirements that support educationreform initiatives (long-term).

The state supports a regionalsystem of Boards of Cooperative Educa-tion (BOCEs) that provide a variety ofservices to local school districts, includ-ing workshops and other professionaldevelopment opportunities for teachers.BOCEs offer their services to groups ofschool districts for a fee. Districts whichwish to purchase services from a BOCEscan obtain state Cooperative ServicesAid to help offset the expense.

Teacher Resource and ComputerTraining Centers were established as astate organization by law in 1984. Thereare 117 Teacher Centers serving eithersingle districts or consortia of districts.The Centers have their own geographi-cal network for collaborating and sharingresources. Approximately 650 of thestate's 714 districts belong to a TeacherCenter. Centers apply every year forfunding from the legislature; an SEAstaff member oversees their budgets,progress, and activities, but does notmonitor them. Local needs assessmentsdetermine the offerings of TeacherCenters. Teacher representatives ap-pointed by local bargaining agents makeup at least 51 percent of the Centers'local policy boards; other membersinclude school board members, parents,higher education representatives, andrepresentatives of a business or industryrelated to computers.

Teacher Certification Policies. NewYork State has a two-stage certificationprocess, with an initial certificate validfor five years and a permanent certificatevalid for life. To earn the initial orprovisional certificate, teachers undergotwo assessments. The first is a test in theliberal arts and sciences (the LAST) thatincludes a writing component. Thesecond is the Assessment of TeachingSkills-Written (ATS-W), a test of peda-gogical knowledge that also contains awriting component.

2

To be eligible for a permanentcertificate, teachers are required toobtain a master's degree in a field relatedto their teaching service. Candidates forpermanent certification must also per-form satisfactorily on a Content Spe-cialty Test (CST) and on a videoassessment of classroom teaching per-formance (a 30-minute videotape ofteaching performance). The videotape israted by at least two permanentlycertified teachers according to rigorousreview and calibration guidelines thatassure validity and reliability. Strict andexplicit directions require that the videosmust be unedited, and strongly recom-mend that videos not be submittedbefore a teacher has been in service for atleast two years.

A Mentor Teacher-Internship Pro-gram was piloted in New York Statebetween 1986-87 and 1990-91. Althoughprogram funding was discontinued bythe state legislature, a number of siteshave attempted to maintain a semblanceof the program with their own resources.The New York State United Teachers(NYSUT) has called for the SEA tosupport legislation that would providefunding to reinstate the program.

State-Supported Programs. Teacherprofessional development issues gener-ally fall under the SEA's EMSC.Certification comes under the Office ofTeaching. The state supports profes-sional development for educatorsthrough workshops in specific program-matic areas, such as special educationand bilingual education.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. New York has received aStatewide Systemic Initiative (SSI) grantfrom the National Science Foundation(NSF), called the New York StateMathematics, Science and TechnologyUrban Network Project. The Project isaligned with the goals of the NewCompact for Learning and seeks compre-hensive reform in the areas of science,math, and technology. Career-longprofessional development for teachers ispart of the overall initiative. Through SSIand Eisenhower funding, the statesponsors summer workshops on schoolrestructuring, student assessment, andconstructivist pedagogy. The NSF alsofunds an Urban Systemic Initiative in

New York City which has a professionaldevelopment component. New York Cityhas also received a grant from theAnnenberg Foundation.

New York is a Goals 2000 state. Thestate disperses competitive grants toinstitutions of higher education, schooldistricts, and collaboratives for localimprovement planning and implementa-tion, preservice education, and profes-sional development. New York is amember of the Interstate New TeacherAssessment and Support Consortiumand receives Eisenhower funding forvarious projects.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state budget allocating funds forprofessional development to districtsaccording to formula. The TeacherCenters received $15 million in FY 1997and $12.5 million in FY 1996 (a decreasefrom $17 million in FY 1995). BOCEs havea line item in the state budget, but theirwork is not exclusive to professionaldevelopment. The state maintains afund, Cooperative Services Aid, to helpoffset district costs of purchasing staffdevelopment from BOCEs .

Federal Funds. The state receivesEisenhower grants, funding from thefederal School-to-Work program andGoals 2000 funds. In FY 1995, the statereceived $18,820,412 in Eisenhowerfunds. In its second year of School-to-Work funding, the state received $10million, a portion of which was used forprofessional development activities. InYear 2 of Goals 2000, the state received$27,112,295, of which approximately$18,800,000 was allocated for profes-sional development.

Local Funds. The state does notmandate a local budget allocation forprofessional development. Local fundspay for a significant portion of profes-sional development resources in fees toBOCEs and Teacher Centers, and forteacher reimbursements.

Foundation Funds. NSF funding forthe SSI project in Year 2 (1994-95) totaled$2.4 million, of which at least $337,000was spent on professional developmentsummer institutes.


Districts are not required to developstaff development plans to be reviewedby the SEA. Some districts negotiateprofessional development plans withtheir local bargaining units. Districtsthat wish to participate in Goals 2000must develop staff development plans asa part of their grant applications.

The state does not mandate aminimum number of days for profes-sional development, but most districtsset aside days for such activities. Thefour days known as "superintendentconference days" are typically used forstaff development; these can be countedas days of attendance for state aidpurposes. The fourth day was added fordistrict activities that specifically sup-port the New Compact for Learning.

Teacher Centers and BOCEs are theprimary sources of professional devel-opment resources for local districts. TheTeacher Centers provide services basedon a needs assessment of teachers inmember districts. BOCEs serve groupsof school districts by providing servicesor resources for a fee; one of theseservices is staff development. Schooldistricts that purchase staff develop-ment from a BOCE can receive stateCooperative Services Aid to help offsetthe cost.


The inclusion of professional devel-opment clauses in local bargainingagreements in New York State isrelatively common. Many districtsincorporate their requirements for theteacher professional development intothe local agreements.

Reimbursement of teachers' ex-penses for professional developmentvaries by district. College tuition is notgenerally reimbursed, although travelexpenses and payment for teachers' timeare covered by many districts. Districtsoften provide release time for teachers topursue professional development.

Teachers receive salary increments tiedto professional development activitiesand college credits, although thesepolicies vary from district to district.


The state's teacher organizationsactively work to influence policy regard-ing professional development. Theylobby in support of continued fundingfor Teacher Centers, and, NYSUT hascalled for the SEA to request renewalfunding for the Mentor Teacher-Intern-ship Program.

Teacher organizations offer exten-sive professional development opportu-nities for their members. The NYSUTEffective Teaching program offers col-lege-level courses serving approximately10,000 teachers each year. Teachers paya fee to attend the "non-theoretical,hands-on, and research-based" courses.NYSUT co-sponsors an annual in-service conference with the SEA. Eachcontent-area teacher organization in thestate offers professional developmentopportunities for its members.

Institutions of higher educationplay a major role in teacher professionaldevelopment in the state, particularlybecause teachers are required to earnmaster's degrees to obtain permanentcertificates. Buffalo State has a profes-sional development school, and otherinstitutions of higher education workwith local districts.

Local professional development ini-tiatives serve the needs of educators intheir immediate areas, and collaborate onstatewide activities. The Capital AreaSchool Development Association, forexample, is an independent study coun-cil working with 118 regional districts toprovide professional development.NYNEX and General Electric providefunding for various local professionaldevelopment activities.

6


Dr. Charles MackeyAdministratorTeacher Certification PolicyOffice of Teaching, Room 5A-11New York Department of EducationCultural Education CenterEmpire State PlazaAlbany, NY 12234518-474-6440

Isabel PicketAssociate in Teacher EducationNew York State Department of EducationTeacher Center Program OfficeRoom 379-EBAAlbany, NY 12234518-473-1234

Charles SantelliDirector of Policy and ProgramsNew York State United Teachers159 Wolf RoadAlbany, NY 12212518-459-5400






3

Teacher Professional Development Profile

North Carolina


North Carolina's K-12 publiceducation system consists of100 county and 17 urban school

districts, 1,984 schools, and over onemillion students. Education policiesemphasize strong state control andregulation to ensure local quality.

In 1995, the General Assembly ofNorth Carolina passed legislation that, ineffect, gave the State Board of Education(SBE) authority over the Department ofPublic Instruction (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA).The SBE was charged with examining thestructure and functions of the state'spublic school system. The SBE report tothe General Assembly presented aframework for restructuring public edu-cation, and precipitated the enactment ofa 1995 law that revised existing statutesgoverning the SEA and placing it underthe sole jurisdiction of the SBE.

SEA departments were consolidatedinto three service divisions: instruc-tional and accountability services; infor-mation and technology resource ser-vices; and finance and personnel ser-vices. Staffing was reduced by nearly 50percenta move that saved $20.9 millionannually for local-level and other agencyuse. State allocations for local staffdevelopment programs were doubled.Funding for state-operated professionaldevelopment programs was adjusted



and, in some cases, eliminated. Therestructuring provided local systemswith increased resources and choices inidentifying and selecting professionaldevelopment suited to their needs.

The SBE created a new stateassessment and local accountabilitysystem. Student performance in grades3-8 are measured annually in reading,writing, and mathematics. A high schoolassessment and accountability plan willbe implemented in 1997-98. Bonusmoney will be awarded to administratorsand teachers in schools where studentsdemonstrate improvements in test scores.The state will intervene and possiblyassume control over schools withconsistently low test-score performance.


The North Carolina Education Cabi-net was created in 1993 to provide acollaborative forum and to set forth acomprehensive vision for education. InNovember of 1995, the Cabinet released adraft report outlining strategic directionsfor a sound educational system: ac-countability; financial and program flex-ibility; continual/seamless learning; uni-versal access; high expectations; col-laboration; and technology.

The Cabinet identified six areas asthe foundation of the comprehensiveplan, one of which addresses teacher

professional development. The draftreport recommends that public educa-tion sectors work collaboratively to"develop a consolidated TeacherInservice and Support System for thestate." The system should focus ontraining in content and performancestandards, methodology and deliverymodels, uses of technology, learningstyles, continuing support and renewal,just-in-time training and help-desk func-tions, and certification of providers. TheCabinet is expected to present to theGeneral Assembly during the 1996-97school year a strategic plan for carryingout these directives for full implementa-tion by the year 2005.

A 1996 review, conducted by theSchool Management Study Group(SMSG) at the University of NorthCarolina, of nine state-supported profes-sional development programs, may helpguide the development of the strategicplan. The study concluded thatincreased effort should be made toensure better coordination and collabo-ration of professional development ini-tiatives. The report cited the lack ofevaluative data to assess the impact ofthese programs on public schools.SMSG made the following recommenda-tions:

Accountability. State-funded pro-grams should be required to de-velop a mission statement and an

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Pofig Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

137 BES1 UOPY AVAILABLE

implementation work plan and tosubmit an annual report (includingan evaluation component) to thelegislature.

Coordination. A Professional De-velopment Council composed of thedirectors of professional develop-ment programs and an SEA repre-sentative should be established.

Governance. An external review ofall professional development pro-grams should be conducted and,where necessary, governance struc-tures should be modified to ensureeffective operations.

As a partner state with the NationalCommission on Teaching and America'sFuture, North Carolina will undergo ateacher development policy inventory,which will help in developing a compre-hensive plan for teacher professionaldevelopment.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheSBE is authorized to set policy onteacher licensure. The ProfessionalPractices Commission, created by theGeneral Assembly in 1987, advises theSBE on the preparation and licensure ofpublic school personnel. The SBE-appointed, 14-member Commission iscomprised of seven K-12 classroomteachers, three public school administra-tors, and four college/university repre-sentatives. The Commission givesNorth Carolina educators a greater voicein shaping policy decisions that affecttheir profession. The Commissionsponsors reports that examine issuesidentified by the SBE and the state'seducators.

North Carolina has had a two-tieredsystem of teacher licensure since 1985.Entry-level teachers receive a two-year,non-renewable Initial License; they mustparticipate in the Initial Licensure Pro-gram (ILP), which consists of anorientation session, mentoring support,and an evaluation process called theNorth Carolina Teacher PerformanceAppraisal System. The 1LP wasdesigned to be an extension of teachereducation programs and to supportprofessional growth during the first twoyears of employment.

2

The ILP is currently being"reimagined," and pilot efforts areunderway to create a performance-basedsystem. The new assessment willincorporate Interstate New TeacherAssessment and Support Consortium(INTASC) standards and a teachingportfolio. The portfolio will include anindividual professional development plan(PDP) designed by the teacher andmentor, and documenting activities thathave been completed. PDPs will identifyareas of need and outline the in-servicestrategy to strengthen skills in targetedareas. SEA-trained Performance ReviewTeams will determine continued licen-sure. The SEA is developing guidelinesand materials to support new 1LPactivities. The SEA monitors local ILPs,provides technical assistance, and evalu-ates ILPs, but each district is responsiblefor local program funding, implementa-tion, and mentor training.

Upon successful completion of theILP, teachers receive a ContinuingCertificate that is valid for five years.Teachers must earn ten semester hoursor 15 renewal credits within each five-year cycle in order to be recertified.Renewal credits are awarded for partici-pation in district-sponsored or otherstate-approved training, workshops, orconference activities.

North Carolina provides extensiveincentives for National Board Certifica-tion. Since 1994, the state has paid theassessment fee ($975) and provided upto three days of paid leave during theschool year. Completion of the NationalBoard for Professional Teaching Stan-dards (NBPTS) portfolio process satis-fies renewal credit requirements for onerenewal period. Successful candidatesreceive a four percent salary increase.Any out-of-state Board-certified teach-ers are automatically eligible for certifica-tion in North Carolina. North Carolinahas 118 Board-certified teachers, thelargest number of any state.

State-Supported Programs. Vari-ous divisions within the SEA provideteacher training activities. The recentrestructuring of the SEA eliminated theeight Technical Assistance Centers(TACs) that provided training and othertechnical assistance to districts. Theestimated $6 million per year that

supported the TACs has been redistrib-uted among districts in the form of blockgrants. The SBE allows districts to poolresources and form Regional Educa-tional Service Alliances which servemany TAC functions, but are morecustomer-driven in their programming.Districts that do not join may broker andselect professional development andtechnical assistance resources on theirown.

The North Carolina Teacher Acad-emy provides intensive and high-qualitytraining experiences to meet the de-mands of education reform and stan-,dards for student learning. The Acad-emy was established based on recom-mendations from the Teacher StaffDevelopment Task Force, appointed bythe General Assembly and the governorto develop a program to provide trainingin site-based management skills, con-tent-area instruction, technology forinstruction, and strategic planning. Thestate-funded Academy offers an inten-sive, one-week summer residential train-ing experience, and has served more than5,000 North Carolina educators since1994. The Academy's director estimatesthat 40 percent of all North Carolinaschools have sent teams to its activities.The Academy's trainer-trainee modeleach year develops a cadre of 70 to 100"teacher trainers" who work as present-ers for the summer program and providetechnical assistance to districts duringthe 'school year. Academy activities areoffered at ten university-based locationsacross the state, and there is no chargefor participation. The Academy con-ducts two follow-up training sessions ateach participating school site during theschool year. Formerly administered bythe SEA, the Academy is now autono-mous, operating from the central admin-istration office of the University of NorthCarolina.

The School Technology Commis-sion was created in 1993 to develop astate plan for using technology inschools. Its 1995 recommendations tothe legislature resulted in a $42 millionappropriation for computers and otherinstructional technology resources. Tenmillion dollars in recurring and $10million in non-recurring funds wereappropriated in 1996. The Commission

recommended that 20 percent of thisallocation be used for staff development.In 1995, the School Technology UsersTask Force developed a regional profes-sional development delivery model formastering a set of technology competen-cies, based on standards set by theAssociation of Educational Communica-tion and Technology and the Interna-tional Society for Technology in Educa-tion. The plan was implemented in thesummer of 1996. Participation is

voluntary.The state funds eight Educational

Consortia that were created by thelegislature in 1991. The university-basedconsortia provide technical assistanceand training to local districts.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Goals 2000 funds supportuniversity-school partnerships, many ofwhich provide professional develop-ment for teachers. East CarolinaUniversity and three county districts areimplementing a peer coaching program.The University of North Carolina atChapel Hill partnership with the ChapelHill-Carrboro City School System cre-ated the Constructing Outstanding Math-ematics Experiences for Teacher andStudents program. Goals 2000 profes-sional development subgrants rangedfrom $75,000 to $200,000 in 1995-96.

The North Carolina Science andMathematics Alliance was created in1991 to implement a $7.8-million State-wide Systemic Initiative (SSI) grant fromthe National Science Foundation. Thefive-year strategic plan focused on acollaborative model for finding newways to bring mathematics and scienceinto alignment with the state's goal ofhigher standards and increased studentperformance. The plan included supportfor Alliance-sponsored teacher trainingprograms.


State Funds. The 1995-96 stateeducation budget included: $3.8 millionfor the Teacher Academy; $764,073 forthe Clinical Teaching Network; $3.4million for the North Carolina Center forthe Advancement of Teaching; $6.9

million for the School Leadership Acad-emy (a training program for administra-tors); approximately $700,000 for Na-tional Board Certification incentives;$1.4 million for the Educational Consortiaand the Mathematics and ScienceEducation Network; and $6 million forthe TACs (eliminated in 1996-97). Thestate provided districts with funds forprofessional development at $100 perFi b. This amount was increased in 1996-97, when TAC money was redistributed.

Federal Funds. North Carolinareceived a $7.7-million Year 2 Goals 2000grant in 1995-96. Ninety percent of thisfunding was distributed to schooldistricts and higher education institu-tions for reform planning, staff develop-ment, and preservice education initia-tives. The state's 1995-96 Eisenhowergrant totaled $5.3 million. State officialsreport that federal programs provide thebulk of staff development funds avail-able at the local level.

Local Funds. Beginning in 1996-97,districts will receive state block grantsfor professional development. These arenot mandated set-asides; they may beused for in-service, or other activities, asdetermined by local boards.


The School Improvement and Ac-countability Act of 1989 directed the SBEto develop and implement guidelines fordeveloping a local performance-basedaccountability plan (PBAP). PBAPswere optional. Districts that partici-patedfirst through school system-based student performance and ac-countability plans and later throughbuilding-level planswere allowed ad-ditional budget flexibility, could requestwaivers of state laws and regulations,and received funds for differentiatedpay.

In 1995, the General Assemblyrepealed differentiated pay and chargedthe SBE with proposing an accountabil-ity model that would improve studentperformance and increase local flexibilityand control. The SBE proposal, knownas the ABC's plan, became law in 1996 as

1J9

the School-based Management andAccountability Program. This programis a natural expansion of PBAP. UnlikePBAP, however, the School-based Man-agement and Accountability Programrequires schools and school systems toparticipate and holds the personnel ateach individual school accountable(through rewards and sanctions) for theacademic performance of its students.This is now the driving force forprofessional development in the state.


North Carolina is a right-to-workstate in which collective bargaining isprohibited. The state salary schedulesets step increases based on teachingexperience and graduate degrees earned.North Carolina teachers who obtainNational Board Certification are awardeda four percent salary increase, theequivalent of two step increases.

Participants in the Teacher Acad-emy receive a $500 honorarium uponcompletion of the program. TheAcademy's teacher trainers receive asalary of $1,200 per week for their workduring the summer. Teachers generallydo not receive stipends or reimburse-ment for participation in in-serviceactivities.


The North Carolina Association ofEducators (NCAE) operates a Profes-sional and Organizational DevelopmentDepartment that offers a variety of in-service opportunities. NCAE presenta-tions and workshops are conducted by afield staff of "Uniserve Consultants"who respond to district and schoolrequests for training. NCAE sponsorstwo statewide, three-day InstructionalProfessional Development workshopseach year, and a special one-dayprogram to help teachers prepare forNational Board Certification. For everyten hours of NCAE training, a teacher iseligible to receive one unit of renewalcredit towards recertification.

3

The North Carolina Center for theAdvancement of Teaching (NCCAT)was established in 1985 by state law.Based at the University of NorthCarolina, NCCAT provides a year-roundseries of residential seminars. Trainingactivities are free of charge and takeplace on or off campus. The activitiesinclude renewal seminars, teacher-scholarresidencies, team building, and profes-sional development programming. Ac-cording to a 1994-95 annual report,approximately 4,000 teachers participatein NCCAT seminars each year, repre-senting 75 percent of all North Carolinaschools. State funding is supplementedby contributions from individuals andfoundations.

The Model Clinical Teaching Net-work involves 12 colleges and universi-ties and 67 school districts. The Networkwas created by the legislature in 1987 toprovide a teacher development con-tinuum from preservice clinical experi-ence through career-long professionaldevelopment. The Network is entirelyfunded by the state.

The University of North CarolinaMathematics and Science EducationNetwork (MSEN) was created by thelegislature in 1984 to improve mathemat-ics and science instruction. MSENoperates ten centers on universitycampuses throughout the state. Itconducts in-service activities on math/science instruction and curriculum de-velopment and sponsors a pre-collegeprogram targeted at increasing math/science interest among minority stu-dents. Funds to support MSEN areprovided primarily through Eisenhowergrants and a state appropriation.

The University of North CarolinaSystem is implementing a network ofuniversity-school teacher education part-nerships to create clinical school set-tings for the preparation, induction, andcontinuing professional development ofeducators. Full implementation isexpected by 2000.


Weaver RodgersExecutive DirectorNorth Carolina Board of EducationEducation Building301 N. Wilmington StreetRaleigh, NC 27601-2825919-715-1322

Julia KronDirectorThe Teacher Academy200 Meredith Drive, Suite 201ADurham, NC 27713919-560-5454

Gloria BowmanCoordinatorProfessional Practices Commission301 N. Wilmington StreetRaleigh, NC 27601919-715-1146



A Report on the Operation, Organiza-tion and Governance of Selected NorthCarolina Programs Established toProvide Continuing Education andProfessional Development of PublicSchool Teachers and Administrators.Board of Governors of the University ofNorth Carolina (April 15, 1996).

The Continuing Professional Develop-ment of Teachers in a Learning Society.North Carolina Professional PracticesCommission (May 1994).

The Initial Certification Program: AnInvestment in Good Teaching. NorthCarolina Professional Practices Commis-sion (May 1991).

140






North DakotaEducation Policy Context

North Dakota, like many otherstates, is striving to create apublic education system that

will prepare students for the twenty-firstcentury. In March of 1990, the NorthDakota Education Action Commissionwas formed, bringing together leadersfrom the public and private sector tocreate a forum for developing a consen-sus regarding education issues in thestate. Months of public meetings, alongwith a review of national research,ultimately led to a "package" of bills,introduced in the 1991 legislative ses-sion, intended to restructure all aspectsof the state's educational system. Of allthe bills presented, however, onlyportions of two were approved forinclusion in the North Dakota CenturyCode (NDCC). These additions addressparticipatory decision making and stu-dent performance standards and assess-ment. The legislature charged the De-partment of Public Instruction (referredto hereafter as the state educationagency, or SEA) to prepare for thedevelopment of student performancestandards and matching assessments,which would be implemented during the1993-95 biennium (although no statefunding was provided to support thisactivity). The legislature also chargedlocal districts with adopting a policy anda plan for implementing participatoryschool decision making. Timelines were



amended in 1993 (HB 1467), delayingimplementation until the 1997-99 bien-nium; both mandates were repealed in1995.

The SEA did, however, work withteacher-based committees in 1992-93and, with the help of the Mid-continentRegional Educational Laboratory(McREL), produced curriculum frame-work documents in the following areas:arts education, business education,languages, health, physical education,language arts, library media, mathemat-ics, science, and social studies.

In 1994, the SEA was awarded agrant from the U.S. Department ofEducation to revise the language artscurriculum frameworks document. Thenew English Language Arts (ELA)Framework was completed in 1995, andtraining for teachers in the developmentand use of performance-based assess-ments subsequently began. This train-ing, along with other activities related tothe implementation of the ELA stan-dards, is being supported by anothergrant that the SEA received from theU.S. Department of Education.


North Dakota first adopted a statemodel for professional development in1986, based on recommendations issuedby the North Dakota Teachers' Profes-

sional Practices Commission (TPPC). Inadopting the TPPC's recommendations,the SEA reported:

The expressed purpose of thisstatewide model is to manageprofessional growth and develop-ment as if it were important...todevote the time and attentionneeded to coordinate needs andservices among the major partici-pants so that professional growthactivities are both effective andefficient. This devotion is needed totie together state and local needs,to coordinate services, to evaluatethe quality of services and mostimportantly, to move away frompiecemeal practices that have de-cidedly limited impact on thegrowth of educational profession-als.

The model reflects a holistic ap-proach that addresses a continuum ofprofessional growth dimensions: per-sonal professionalism, through individu-ally initiated and funded growth experi-ences; academic training, through formaland structured educational experiences;guided practice, through professionalcoaching; climate, regarding the intellec-tual and physical environment; empow-erment, through supportive policies andfunding; and personal wellness, stress-ing attention to personal needs. Al-though funding was not provided,

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

141

2

districts were encouraged to develop alocal professional development planbased on this model.

In 1993, the legislature created theEducation Standards and Practices Board(ESPB), which was established in July of1995 and replaced the TPPC. Unlike itspredecessor, the ESPB is an autonomousentity authorized to set policies pertain-ing to teacher certification and profes-sional conduct, as well as to approveteacher preparation programs. Boardmembers are appointed by the governorand consist of four public schoolclassroom teachers, one private schoolclassroom teacher, one school boardmember, two school administrators, andone college of education dean.

The ESPB makes recommendationsfor teacher in-service activities and hasrecently completed a two-year processthat involved over 1,400 educators andcommunity members. This collaborativeeffort produced The Professional Devel-opment Guidelines: Effective Practices,a document that is being used topromote the effective use of professionaldevelopment as a tool to drive thecontinuous improvement of education.

The Guidelines can be used toassess an entire curriculum, a specificcourse, or a sustained professionaldevelopment process. Currently, dis-tricts are being encouraged to use theGuidelines voluntarily as part of theirstrategic planning. However, it isanticipated that eventually they will be

incorporated into the North CentralAccreditation (NCA) process. A state-wide delivery model is currently beingimplemented to provide training forschool staff on the application of theGuidelines (see below).

Teacher Certification Policies. Be-ginning teachers receive a two-yearEntrance Certificate. After two years ofcontracted services, teachers may obtaina Professional Certificate, which isrenewable every five years. Require-ments for renewal include a minimum of30 days of teaching experience, foursemester hours of college credit, andthree positive recommendations fromsupervisors.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA provides a full range of professionaldevelopment opportunities for regularand special education teachers andadministrators, auxiliary personnel, par-ents, and school board and communitymembers. SEA staff respond to profes-sional development requests from thefollowing sources: an individual, unit, ordivision within the SEA; special educa-tion units; or Teacher Center staff(described below).

North Dakota has ten TeacherCenters, which were established in 1978,that provide support services to localdistricts. Each Center is staffed by apart-time director and governed by alocally elected board. Center directors,who are convened at least three timeseach year, comprise the Teacher Center

The Professional Development Guidelines: Effective Practices

The Guidelines are centered around the following eight principles, which statethat effective professional development is:

1. connected to identified vision, mission, and goals;2. sustained and continuous;3. a process which, throughout, promotes participation of all partners;4. based on valid research and proven theory;5. learner-centered and focused on the participants;6. modeled upon and demonstrates effective teaching strategies for

transference into the classroom;7. inclusive of coaching and/or mentoring support; and8. assessed through feedback and documentation of participant and student

outcomes.

142

Network. An SEA staff member servesas the liaison to the network. TeacherCenter services are supported throughdistrict fees and state funds.

The SEA Office of InstructionalSupport has a Special Projects Unit thatis responsible for providing technicalassistance and in-service training tolocal board members and district- andschool-based personnel. Professionaldevelopment activities sponsoredthrough this unit focus on civil rightsdesegregation, equity issues,multicultural education, and HIV/AIDSeducation; other activities have includedspecial programs, such as the EnglishLanguage Arts Collaborative and theEnglish Language Arts Assessmentprojects (see below).

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The state-level Goals 2000Professional Development Committeetargeted a portion of grant funds tosupport training in the application ofESPB Professional Development Guide-lines. Teams representing each of theTeacher Centers, along with ESPB staffand Goals 2000 Professional Develop-ment Committee members, attended atwo-day training session to learn how touse the Guidelines; team members arenow providing turnkey training todistricts. Districts that request informa-tion regarding the Guidelines will receivea full year of training sessions.

Goals 2000 planning and implemen-tation subgrants are available, on acompetitive basis, to school districts tosupport local educational improvement,professional development, andpreservice teacher education. Goals2000 funds are also being targeted toaddress the needs of Native Americanlearners and the development of stan-dards in the areas of Native Americanlanguage and culture. The state is givingpreferences in awarded subgrants todistrict consortia as a way of encourag-ing greater collaboration and coordina-tion among local systems.

Two recent major U.S. Departmentof Education grants gave the SEAimpetus in implementing professionaldevelopment programs focused on En-glish/language arts. In 1993, a three-yeargrant from the Fund for Innovation in

Education (HE) was used to implementthe English Language Arts (ELA)Standards Project. This project repre-sented a collaborative effort amongpublic and private schools, institutionsof higher education, and professionalorganizations to improve the teachingand learning of English/language artsthrough the development of detailed,content-specific frameworks; a pilottrainer of trainers model; and thedevelopment and dissemination of certi-fication and recertification guidelines forteachers of English. Each year, teams ofteachers and administrators attended atwo-week summer institute and thenprovided 15 hours of turnkey training tocolleagues at their school sites duringthe year. Eight schools piloted thetraining component in 1994, and 16districts participated in 1995. Withadditional funding support from Title Iin 1996, a group of educators represent-ing public and private schools, institu-tions of higher education, and SEA staffalso received training. Approximately400 teachers experienced an in-depthreview of the ELA Curriculum Frameworkand of alternative assessment writing,including rubrics. Participants in stan-dards development and training activi-ties earned graduate credits.

In 1996, North Dakota received afollow-up, four-year grant from the U.S.Department of Education to fund theELA Standards-Based AssessmentProject, which is supporting teachers inthe development, field-testing, and evalu-ation of state tests in reading, writing,speaking, and listening. North Dakota'seducation community (including ap-proximately 450 teachers) will be in-volved in developing the assessmentsand determining their validity. Duringeach year of project, the designedassessment will be field tested.


State Funds. The state does notearmark funds for local professionaldevelopment. The legislature appropri-ates $200,000 per biennium for the tenTeacher Centers. The SEA allocates$3,700 in contracts for each Teacher

Center to conduct HIV/AIDS educationtraining. The Center for Innovation inInstruction (see below) receives fundingthrough an SEA contract of $139,000 anda line-item allocation of $50,000 fromValley City State University.

Federal Funds. Federal programshave been credited for supporting muchof North Dakota's standards develop-ment and teacher training activities. TheU.S. Department of Education provideda $694,000 grant for the ELA StandardsProject from 1993 to 1996; a follow-upgrant of $1,576,643 funds the ELAAssessment Project from 1996 to 1999.Some supplementary funding from Title Iwas used to implement the 1996 summerinstitute. During the 1995-96 year, NorthDakota received a $1.3-million Goals 2000grant and a $1.2-million Eisenhowergrant.

Local Funds. Districts rely heavilyon federal programs such as Title I, TitleVI, and Title II to fund professionaldevelopment activities. Allocations forteacher in-service activities are made atthe discretion of the district, based onidentified school improvement needs,and vary accordingly.


Since 1980, local systems have beenrequired to maintain North CentralAccreditation. As such, districts mustsubmit a school improvement plan to theState Board of Education every fiveyears. Professional development is arequired component of the plan. Theschool-year calendar must provide aminimum of 180 instructional days.Many districts add five discretionarydays, some of which are used for in-service activities.


The state teacher salary schedule isbased on the accumulation of advanceddegrees, college credits, and continuingeducation units (CEUs). In rare in-stances, tuition reimbursement may be

awarded, as determined by local collec-tive bargaining agreements.

Teachers participating in ELA Stan-dards and Assessment projects receivedstipends for their development work andsummer institute training.


The North Dakota Education Asso-ciation (NDEA) is a primary professionaldevelopment provider. Every October,the NDEA hosts a two-day InstructionalConference, which features keynotepresentations by leading educationexperts and professional developmentworkshops covering a variety of issues.In 1943, legislation was passed to closeschools during the NDEA conference,which attracts over 4,000 teachers peryear. Throughout the school year,NDEA conducts sectional meetingsfocused on subject-matter and peda-gogical areas. NDEA also sponsorssummer activities, including an annualconference and several regional work-shops.

Many NDEA activities are imple-mented through the Teacher Centers.Three years ago, NDEA began a localcapacity initiative that allows NDEAstaff to work extensively with four or fivedistricts each year to research anddesign a 15-hour professional develop-ment module. Participants of NDEAtraining events are eligible to receiveCEUs.

The Center for Innovation in In-struction (CII) was created in 1993 topromote the use of instructional technol-ogy in North Dakota's schools. Housedon the campus of Valley City StateUniversity, CII offers a variety ofprofessional development services byworking with district consortia to iden-tify local needs and interests. In additionto customized training, CII sponsors anannual Technology Leadership Confer-ence, conducts regional workshops,houses an instructional technologyReview Center, and publishes thequarterly Innovator newsletter that isdistributed to every teacher in the state.CII uses a "train the trainer" delivery

1433

model that enables districts to maintainongoing professional development. TheCenter is staffed by a director, anassistant director, two training coordina-tors, and a field network of consultants.CH has several funding sources, includ-ing the University, the SEA, and districtfees.

The Greater Barnes County Consor-tium was formed in 1994. The Consor-tium consists of 13 districts located inthe southeast region of the state. Itsactivities are governed by a steeringcommittee, which is comprised of teach-ers and administrators representing allparticipating schools. The Consortiumconducted a one-year needs assessmentto identify priority areas for in-serviceactivities at the system, building, andindividual levels. Identified trainingpriorities include interpersonal commu-nication, technology, and curriculuminfusion. Consortium activities arefunded through fees collected fromparticipating districts ($50,000), the state,McREL, and various federal sources(Goals 2000, Title I, School-to-Work, andTech Prep).


Marilyn RidenhowerExecutive DirectorEducation Standards and Practices Board600 E. BoulevardBismarck, ND 58505-0440701-328-2297

Clarence BinaDirector of Special ProjectsOffice of Instructional SupportDepartment of Public Instruction600 E. Boulevard, 9th FloorBismarck, ND 58505-0440701-328-2098

Helen BuscheDirector of Professional DevelopmentNorth Dakota Education Association410 East Thayer AvenueP.O. Box 5005Bismarck, ND 58502-5005701-223-0450


The Professional Development Guide-lines: Effective Practices, EducationStandards and Practices Board (Septem-ber 1996).

Professional Development Model:A"Holistic" Approach, North DakotaDepartment of Public Instruction (1985).






144


OhioEducation Policy Context

Ohio's K-12 public educationsystem serves over one millionstudents annually. There were

611 districts and 3,684 schools in 1995-96.

The Ohio legislature has spear-headed the development of state stan-dards for schools and school personneland have promoted local decisionmaking on how to meet these educa-tional goals. The State Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) hasbeen restructured and its role reshapedfrom regulation and compliance toserving and supporting schools, specifi-cally in school improvement efforts.

In 1992, Ohio government, business,and education leaders embarked on ayear-long "gap analysis" process toidentify needs in the current educationalsystem. The gap analysis report, Re-moving the Barriers, led to the develop-ment of the Building Excellent Schoolsfor Today & the 21st Century (BEST)initiative, which establishes strategiesfor improving education and focuses onhigh performance and high standards;accountability for results; parent, busi-ness, and community involvement; andequal access to quality education. TheSEA, under the direction of the State



Board of Education (SBE), has beenworking with the Learner OutcomesPanel, a broad-based group representingeducational stakeholders, to set adirection for Ohio's schools by develop-ing new school standards.

The proposed school standards willfocus the system of education onpreparing all learners to be successful bydefining core learner standards for Pre-Kthrough the twelfth grade, with addi-tional related standards for gifted,special needs, and vocational students.The standards also include chapters forchartered nonpublic, special purpose,and nonchartered, nontax-supportedschools. The emphasis on accountabil-ity for results and increased studentachievement is operationalized throughperformance standards for schools anddistricts. Progress toward meeting thesestandards will be reviewed annually todetermine the state support and/orintervention necessary to ensure satis-factory progress. The state's VentureCapital program awards grants directlyto schools that are prepared to undertakemajor school improvements. Thesegrants can be used for professionaldevelopment. These five-year grantshave been awarded to over 500 schools.The State Superintendent also an-nounced an Urban Schools Initiative in1996. It is intended to assist the state's20 urban districts.

The focus on school improvement isreinforced by having the bulk ofprofessional development dollars flowdirectly to schools; by maintaining amajor commitment of state funds totechnology, particularly at the primarylevels; and by consolidating programs,so that schools have the flexibility tomeet state standards in ways theybelieve are most appropriate for theirrespective student populations.


Ohio's reform agenda encompassesstandards for teacher preparation, licen-sure, and professional development. InOctober of 1996, the SBE adopted newteacher education and licensure stan-dards, which identify performance-basedmeasures for ensuring that teachers arewell-prepared and will continue to learnthroughout their careers. Full implemen-tation of the new standards will com-mence in the fall of 1998. The centerpieceof the standards is an entry-yearprogram for beginning teachers, whichincludes mentoring and performanceassessment components modeled afterthe Interstate New Teacher Assessmentand Support Consortium (INTASC)standards. In addition, teacher prepara-tion standards endorsed by the NationalCouncil for the Accreditation of Teacher

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polity Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


145

Education (NCATE) will be used toreview all Ohio teacher education pro-grams. The new standards also outlinerequirements for continuous profes-sional development that will be linked tolicensure advancement and renewal (seebelow).

To complement the SBE's vision forteacher standards, the SEA merged itsdivisions for certification and profes-sional development into one unit.Created in May of 1996, the Office ofTeacher Education, Certification andProfessional Development exemplifiesthis new approach to providing aseamless professional development sys-tem. In addition, Ohio is a partner statewith the National Commission on Teach-ing and America's Future and willundergo a teacher development policyaudit, the results of which will be used toinstitute a comprehensive plan forteacher professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies.Upon completion of all preservicerequirements, entry-level teachers re-ceive a four-year Provisional Certificate,which is renewable with six semesterhours or 18 continuing education units(CEUs). After three years of satisfactoryteaching experience and the accrual of30 semester hours beyond the bachelor'sdegree, teachers may advance to aneight-year Professional Certificate. TheProfessional Certificate may be renewedwith 12 semester hours or 36 CEUs.Teachers with master's degrees whohave earned at least 12 semester hourssince obtaining their Professional Certifi-cates are granted permanent certifica-tion. Since 1996, Ohio has supportedteachers seeking to obtain NationalBoard Certification by providing statefunds to pay for application fees and byrecognizing, through grants, teacherswho have achieved this professionallicense. Currently, Ohio has six NationalBoard Certified teachers.

Under the newly adopted TeacherEducation and Licensure Standards(which take effect in the fall of 1998), allbeginning teachers will be required toparticipate in a first-year inductionprogram and pass a performance assess-ment before they are granted theProfessional License. Once obtained,renewal of the Professional License will

2

be required every eight years through-out a teacher's career. Renewal require-ments may be fulfilled through a varietyof activities, such as coursework, CEUs,and other professional activities asapproved by a local professional devel-opment committee. In addition, teacherswill now be required to earn master'sdegrees or complete 30 semester hoursof graduate credit in classroom teachingand/or an area of licensure within tenyears of obtaining their initial Profes-sional Licenses. Once the new stan-dards are enacted, permanent certificateswill no longer be issued.

In preparation for the implementa-tion of the new licensure standards, aseries of pilot projects for the BeginningTeacher Residency Program have beenimplemented. The residency combinesmentoring support, training in instruc-tional theory, and the PRAXIS III:Classroom Performance Assessment.Beginning teachers are paired with non-evaluative mentor teachers in theirbuildings who teach the same subject.Mentor teachers spend two hours eachweek (both inside and outside theclassroom) with beginning teachers, anduniversity faculty conduct weekly ses-sions with them, engaging in reflectivediscussions focused on the 19 criteriaused in the PRAXIS III. State-trainedassessors, most of whom were class-room teachers themselves, conduct theassessment and determine advancementin licensure. Since 1994-95, nine Ohiouniversities and 46 school districts haveparticipated, involving a total of 209beginning teachers. Early evaluationresults from the pilot found thatbeginning teachers and mentors acted as"co-learners" and that both perceivedthe PRAXIS III to be a valuable resourcein developing a framework for instruc-tional practice. A more formal, externalevaluation is planned for 1997.

State-Supported Programs. In1991, Ohio's General Assembly appro-priated funds to establish eight centersfor teacher training and development,known as Regional Professional Devel-opment Centers (RPDCs). These Cen-ters serve two major purposes. First, theRPDCs create and coordinate profes-sional development opportunities inresponse to local needs; second, Center

X46

staff assist districts with school im-provement strategies. The Centers buildcollaboration among school districts,institutions of higher education, privateproviders, and others interested inteacher development and school im-provement.

During the 1995-96 school year,Ohio expanded the number of RPDCs to12 and realigned their regions. The newservice areas are roughly continuouswith Ohio's Economic DevelopmentRegions, which serve as the regionalstructure for many state programs,including School-to-Work and TechPrep. An attempt has been made todetermine the extent to which profes-sional development needs are being metthrough the work of the RPDCs bycategorizing the types of activities inwhich teachers engage and quantifyingtheir involvement. Preliminary reportsindicate that school improvement activi-ties slightly outnumber curriculum ac-tivities, and each of these activitiesvastly outnumber technology trainingand workshops.

Additional state-supported profes-sional development initiatives includeVenture Capital grants to schools,SchoolNet Summer Institutes (Ohio'sstatewide technology program), andlocal professional development blockgrants. Other major areas of training andtechnical assistance by the state includeschool improvement strategies, othertechnology areas, and curriculum devel-opment, particularly as it relates tostudent standards.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Project Discoverya col-laborative project of higher educationinstitutions, the SEA, and local dis-trictswas Ohio's Statewide SystemicInitiative (SSI), funded by the NationalScience Foundation (NSF). This middle-school-level professional developmentproject focused on strengthening teach-ers' knowledge and skills in inquiry andproblem-solving strategies for math andscience instruction. The delivery systemwas organized by regions to fosterteacher and educator networking. An-other component of this model was tobuild a critical mass of trained teachers ina school. Although NSF funding forProject Discovery expired in 1996, the

state continues to support this activitythrough the RPDCs. NSF fundingcontinues in Cincinnati, Cleveland, andColumbus, where Urban Systemic Initia-tives (USI) grants have been awarded.

Through Goals 2000, funding isavailable in Ohio for school districtswishing to establish local professionaldevelopment committees before themandated implementation in the fall of1998, as authorized in the teacherlicensure standards adopted by the SBEin October of 1996. Participating districtswill be required to: (1) establish localprofessional development committeesby the spring of 1997 and operate themthroughout 1997-98; (2) operate under awaiver from the current certificaterenewal procedures; and (3) meet quar-terly with SEA staff to report on theirprogress and assist the SEA in thedevelopment of guidelines for theoperation of local professional develop-ment committees. Grants of up to $50,000will be awarded on a competitive basis.


State Funds. The state allocates $8million annually in local professionaldevelopment block grants. Each districtreceives a grant based on a per-pupilfunding formula. From 1991 to 1997, thelegislature has allocated $23 million instate monies to support the RPDCs.Approximately 552 schools have beenawarded five-year Venture Capital grants,which provide $25,000 each year topromote staff capacity and create perfor-mance-driven learning environments.Since 1996, $1.6 million in state funds hasbeen appropriated to provide incentivesfor teachers who are pursuing NationalBoard Certification.

Federal Funds. Ohio received$3,715,308 in Goals 2000 funding in 1994,$14,833,684 in 1995, and $14,239,564 in1996. Approximately $1 million of Ohio'sGoals 2000 funds will be used to supportthe piloted local professional develop-ment committees. Ohio also received$8,711,522 in Eisenhower funds forprofessional development in 1995.

Local Funds. Districts rely heavilyupon state-funded block grants andfederal Eisenhower funds to supportlocal professional development.


Generally speaking, districts are notrequired to design or implement a formalprofessional development plan. If thedraft standards for schools are adopted,such a requirement would be in place atthe building level by the 1998-99 schoolyear. The state requires a 180-dayschool year calendar, of which two daysmay be designated for in-service activi-ties.


Teacher salaries are determined by astate salary scale, which may besupplemented through local bargainingagreements. Advancement on the salaryscale is awarded based on years ofexperience, degrees earned, and continu-ing graduate credits. Tuition reimburse-ment policies are determined at the locallevel.


The University of Cincinnati (UC), inpartnership with the Cincinnati PublicSchools district, created the CincinnatiInitiative for Teacher Education (CITE)in 1987 for the purpose of improvingteacher preparation. CITE established 13Professional Practice Schools to provideclassroom training experiences for UCeducation students. Lead teachers fromthe district are assigned to serve asmentors to UC education studentsduring their required fifth-year place-ment at a Professional Practice School.The lead teachers and UC faculty workcollaboratively to provide students withguidance and feedback. In turn, this

147

initiative also fosters professional rela-tionships and dialogue between practic-ing teachers and education facultyregarding the issues of instruction andteacher quality.

The Ohio State University (OSU)College of Education, in cooperationwith the Franklin County School Dis-tricts, began creating professional devel-opment school (PDS) sites during the1991-92 school year. Modeled after thesix principles issued by the HolmesPartnership (formerly known as theHolmes Group), PDS sites promoteintellectual and resource exchange amongschool personnel, students of educa-tion, and college faculty. The OSU/Franklin County School Districts Profes-sional Development School Policy Boardsets operational criteria and governs theactivities of PDS sites. OSU facultyserve as supervisors and work at schoolsites with experienced teachers whohave been trained to serve in a"cooperating" role to evaluate andprovide guidance to student internsplaced at PDS sites. Participatingdistricts and schools earn compensationpoints for implementing various PDScomponents; these points may beredeemed to cover the cost of enrollmentin university courses for certified districtemployees. There are currently 12 PDSsites represented in this partnership.


Nancy EberhartDirectorTeacher Certification and ProfessionalDevelopmentOhio Department of Education65 South Front StreetColumbus, OH 43215614-466-2761

Marilyn TroyerAssociate DirectorTeacher Certification and ProfessionalDevelopmentOhio Department of Education65 South Front StreetColumbus, OH 43215614-644-0168

3

Sheryl HansenDirectorEducation Improvement and InnovationOhio Education Association225 E. Broad St., Box 2550Columbus, OH 43213614-228-4526

1 Sources: National Resource Data Centerand National Center for Education Statistics,U.S. Department of Education. Figures arefor 1993.





X48


OklahomaEducation Policy Context

0klahoma Task Force 2000 wasestablished in 1989 by then-Governor Henry Bellmon to

develop a comprehensive educationplan to enhance student learning,address .school funding issues, andprovide incentives for Oklahoma teach-ers. The Task Force's recommendationsresulted in the Education Reform andFunding Act (HB 1017) of 1990, whichconsolidated rural districts, increasedschool aid funding for these districts,raised the minimum teacher salaryschedule, established a state corecurriculum and testing program, andmandated training for local school boardmembers. This reform agenda required asubstantial financial investment, andOklahomans passed a tax referendum tofund it. State appropriations for publiceducation have increased to $1.4 billionannuallynearly double pre-reform eraspending.

Standards-based learning is a majorthrust of HB 1017. The OklahomaCurriculum Committee outlined compe-tencies and curricular standards in thedocument, Learner Outcomes: Okla-homa State Competencies, which wasadopted by the State Board of Education(SBE) in January of 1991. These learneroutcomes became the basis for PriorityAcademic Student Skills (PASS), a corecurriculum mandate that was imple-mented in 1993-94. The PASS curriculum



includes mathematics, science, socialstudies, language arts, languages, thearts, and the integration of technologyeducation, instructional technology,health/safety and physical education,and information skills. The OklahomaCore Curriculum Test is administered tostudents in grades 5, 8 and 11. Studentsare tested in mathematics, science,reading, and writing; other subject areaswill be phased in by the spring of 2000.Test results are publicly reported and areused to drive instruction. Districts arerequired to provide full-year remediationand retest students who perform poorly.

HB 1017 also created new accredita-tion standards, which require districts todevelop a four-year ComprehensiveLocal Education Plan (CLEP) focusingon school improvement, professionaldevelopment, capital improvement, andalternative education. To support localschool improvement efforts, the statehas loosened regulations (through aderegulation process) and has estab-lished a popular alternative teachercertification program.


Oklahoma does not have a statepolicy regarding standards for theprofessional development of publicschool educators. However, efforts inthis regard have become the focus ofwork by the Oklahoma Commission on

Teacher Preparation (OCTP). The 20-member OCTP is composed of teachers,administrators, college faculty, and citi-zens who are appointed by the legisla-ture and the governor. The OCTP wascreated by legislative statute in 1994 todevelop a competency-based system ofteacher preparation and testing. Theseresponsibilities will be fully assumed byOCTP in July of 1997. The OCTP isorganized into five committees: (1)assessment; (2) teacher education pro-gram approval and accreditation; (3)certification and licensure; (4) profes-sional development; and (5) administra-tive operations. The OCTP has statutoryauthority to deliver professional devel-opment institutes (PDIs) which, by law,provide a minimum of 30 clock hours ofcompetency-based training and requireteachers to demonstrate competenciesby developing a work product that canbe used in the classroom. In Decemberof 1994, the OCTP issued its "Report onEducator Preparation and ProfessionalDevelopment," which identified eightcompetency areas for professional de-velopment. The Teacher PreparationAct (HB 1549), passed in July of 1995,mandates that these competencies bedisseminated by the Oklahoma Depart-ment of Education (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA)to each school district. The state-fundedprofessional development centers (PDCs)(see below) are directed to providetechnical assistance in the implementa-

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

149

tion of the competencies to local schooldistricts. The OCTP is currently seekingfunds to implement the PDIs.

In addition, Oklahoma is a partnerstate with the National Commission onTeaching and America's Future and willundergo a teacher development policyaudit, the results of which will be used toinstitute a comprehensive plan forteacher professional development.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheTeacher Reform Act of 1980 (HB 1706)provides the foundation for existingteacher preparation and certificationpolicies. Through HB 1706, Oklahomabecame the first state in the nation toestablish a support program for begin-ning teachers, the Entry-Year Assis-tance Program, which is now called theResidency Program. Under this program,all first-year teachers are issued a licenseand are required to participate in a one-year induction program. Districts areresponsible for assigning each first-yearteacher a residency committee, consist-ing of a mentor teacher (who has at leasttwo years of teaching experience), aschool administrator, and a facultymember from a college of education.

Three committee-resident teacherconferences are held each year. Commit-tee members must observe and evaluatenew teachers based on four performancedimensions: human relations, teachingand assessment, classroom manage-ment, and professionalism. The mentorteacher is paid a state-supplied stipendnot to exceed $500 and must engage in aminimum of 72 hours of consultation andobservation. Mentors may not beassigned to more than one residentteacher during each school year. Schooladministrators and college faculty mem-bers may serve simultaneously onseveral residency committees, however.Teachers who successfully complete theresidency program at the end of one yearare eligible to receive the StandardCertificate, which is renewable every fiveyears, provided that the teacher hasmaintained active and satisfactory teach-ing employment. Teachers who, after asecond residency year, are still notrecommended for certification may nolonger hold a teaching certificate in thestate of Oklahoma. More than 24,000first-year teachers have participated in

the residency program since its incep-tion.

The residency program must beimplemented in accordance with theguidelines and evaluation instrumentsissued by the SBE. Currently, committeemembers are not required to participatein any formal training. The OCTP plansto offer PDIs for mentor teacher training.All training will be research-based andwill focus on best practices related tobeginning teacher induction andmentoring.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA sponsors statewide institutes andregional workshops to assist teachers inupgrading their skills regarding the corecurriculum. In-service activities focuson areas of need as determined bystudent performance on core curriculumtests. Statewide professional develop-ment is largely coordinated through alocally based network of PDCs.

Oklahoma's PDCs are an outgrowthof the Federal Teacher Center Act of1976. The Centers became state-fundedin 1981 and have grown in number fromtwo to seven sites located regionallythroughout the state. The PDCs arehoused within selected districts andprovide opportunities for all stateeducators to access information andresources that promote quality instruc-tion in the classroom and overall schoolimprovement. PDCs offer, on a non-feebasis, customized training and technicalassistance in professional skills, instruc-tional materials and equipment, informa-tion systems, and state and federalrequirements. Each PDC is staffed by afull-time director and a secretary; theyare managed under the jurisdiction oftheir host district. PDCs are required tosubmit an annual report to the SBE.Documentation maintained on PDCactivities indicates that educators fromevery school district request and receiveservices through this initiative.


State Funds. Under the 1980Teacher Reform Act, the legislatureappropriates funds directly to eachdistrict for the exclusive purpose ofprofessional development. The appro-

15 0

priation is based on average dailyattendance, and its 1995-96 rate of $1.75per pupil totaled close to $1 millionstatewide. Each of the seven PDCsreceives an average annual appropria-tion of $99,000. The Residency Programis a $1-million line-item expenditure inthe state education budget.

Federal Funds. Many SEA-spon-sored professional development activi-ties are supplemented with federal fundsprovided by the Title II, Title IV, and TitleVII programs. Oklahoma received a $3-million Eisenhower Professional Devel-opment grant in 1995-96. Oklahomarejected Goals 2000 funding.

Local Funds. Local funds forprofessional development beyond state-appropriated amounts are expended atdistricts' discretion. In-kind support(e.g., facility space and utilities) fromPDC host districts is valued at $350,000per year.


The Comprehensive Local Educa-tion Plan (CLEP), required for schoolaccreditation, includes a professionaldevelopment component. Districts mustestablish a professional developmentcommittee consisting primarily of teach-ers and including administrators andparents. The committee is responsiblefor designing the professional develop-ment plan which must be approved bythe SBE before the district can receive itsstate allocation for professional devel-opment. Mandated components of theplan include multicultural education,outreach to parents, and HIV/AIDSeducation and prevention. Other pro-gram components are based on locallydetermined needs.

'Accreditation standards also re-quire each certified teacher and adminis-trator within the district to earn 75professional development points everyfive years. One professional develop-ment point is awarded for each clockhour of in-service activity, and 15 pointsare awarded for every semester hour ofcollege credit. Districts are responsiblefor awarding and tracking the number ofprofessional development points earned.

I

I

By statute, districts may allocate up tofive professional development days peryear, which are funded by local budgets.


The state teacher salary schedule isbased on a teacher's years of service anddegrees earned. Many districts' bar-gaining agreements award step in-creases for additional graduate credits.State law allows teachers to requesttuition reimbursement of up to 50percent, but local funds are generally notavailable to honor such requests.Teacher mentors in the ResidencyProgram receive a stipend that may notexceed $500.


The Oklahoma Education Associa-tion (OEA) offers an extensive profes-sional development program that con-sists of workshops and conferences.The OEA has six regional offices; eachhas an Instructional Advocacy Special-ist and 30 field staff members who areavailable to fulfill training requests fromdistricts. OEA's annual convention isconsidered to be the largest professionaldevelopment opportunity offered toteachers in the state. Each year, 8,000 to12,000 teachers participate in this two-day event. Topics featured during theconvention are determined by the needsidentified by OEA members. Twelvesubject-matter associations sponsorworkshops that are offered at theconvention. The OEA Focus newsletter,published eight times each year, pro-vides information on OEA events andother teacher-related interests. Inresponse to the OCTP' s revision ofteacher certification policies, OEA beganpublishing an occasional newsletter,entitled OEA Issues, which focuses onprofessional development and othercritical issues.

The Northwest Oklahoma Coopera-tive for Inservice (NWOCI) was createdin 1979. NWOCI is a cooperative ofschools in the 14 counties that consti-

tute the rural northwestern region of thestate. The Dean of NorthwesternOklahoma State University's School ofEducation serves as executive secretaryand, together with the NWOCI Board ofDirectors, conducts an annual needsassessment of school personnel to helpNWOCI identify and plan upcoming in-service topics. NWOCI contracts na-tionally prominent consultants and of-fers a variety of in-service workshops.Two delegates from each participatingdistrict comprise the NWOCI delegateassembly from which the Board ofDirectors is elected. The Board meets bi-monthly. Participating districts pay anannual membership fee assessed at $.75per average daily attendance, but not toexceed $1,000.

The Southeastern Oklahoma Coun-cil for Public School Improvement(SOCPSI) is a partnership between theSchool of Education and BehavioralSciences at Southeastern OklahomaState University (SOSU) and the schooldistricts in the 12-county region thatSOSU serves. SOCPSI was formed inJuly of 1991 to increase the educationaleffectiveness of public schools inSoutheastern Oklahoma and to enhancethe University's involvement in K-12public education. The goals of thepartnership are to expose educators tonational areas of instructional concern;facilitate problem-solving through net-working and interchange; showcaseOklahoma's effective school plans byreporting on successful programs; andbuild linkages between districts' needsand the School of Education andBehavioral Sciences' programs. SOCPSIprovides professional development op-portunities, such as substitute teachertraining, forums on critical issues per-taining to education, and workshops forpublic school guidance counselors.SOCPSI also sponsors two major presen-tations every year. Educational expertsat the national, state, and regional levelshave been featured at these events.

The Child Service DemonstrationCenter (CSDC) offers an array of servicesto Oklahoma schools, teachers, stu-dents, and other organizations con-cerned with the welfare of at-risk andlearning-disabled youth. The CSDCprovides direct services to schools in the

151

areas of professional development, adap-tive interventions, consultation, andassistance in proposal writing. TheCSDC has developed 27 workshoptopics, as described in their ProfessionalDevelopment Workshop Series cata-logue, which is mailed to every Okla-homa school district each spring. Prior-ity for workshop development is basedupon state mandates and requests byschool districts and educational organi-zations. The CSDC also conducts made-to-order workshops, such as GrantWriting and Special Education Catego-ries Overview, to meet special requestsfrom school districts. In 1995-96, a totalof 8,421 Oklahoma teachers representing243 school districts and agencies at-tended CSDC-sponsored professionaldevelopment activities.


Ramona PaulAssistant State Superintendent forProfessional ServicesOklahoma State Department ofEducationHodge Education Building2500 North Lincoln BoulevardOklahoma City, OK 73105405-521-4311

Linda RuhmanDirectorProfessional Development andResidency ProgramOklahoma State Department ofEducation405-521-4527

Donna A. PayneExecutive DirectorOklahoma Commission on TeacherPreparation3033 North Walnut, Suite 120-EOklahoma City, OK 73104405-525-2612

Floyd CoxInstructional Advocacy SpecialistOklahoma Education AssociationP.O.Box 18485Oklahoma City, OK 73154405-528-7785

btS I COPY AVAILABLE


Investing in Oklahoma: The Progress ofEducation Reform (Volume one). Okla-homa State Department of Education(April 1996).

"Report on Educator Preparation andProfessional Development." OklahomaCommission on Teacher Preparation(December 1994).

Oklahoma Professional DevelopmentCenters: Project Proposal for SchoolYear 1995-96.

OEA Issues (a publication dealing withprofessional issues pertinent to publiceducation). Oklahoma Education Asso-ciation.






C RE


OregonEducation Policy Context

Oregon has embraced educationreform, reshaping policies andpractice through legislation. In

1984, the Essential Learning Skills andCommon Curriculum Goals, which articu-late basic skills expectations for localschools, were developed. The SchoolImprovement and Professional Develop-ment Act of 1987 was enacted to developlighthouse schools throughout the state,allowing schools to engage in innova-tion by creating their own solutions toeducational problems. Almost half of theschool districts in Oregon have partici-pated in this program, which combinestop-down and bottom-up support. In1989, the Oregon legislature enacted the21st Century Schools Program, permit-ting waivers of statutes, rules, andcontracts that inhibit progress towardschool improvement. Schools mayrestructure school operations and pro-fessional relationships as outlined in aschool improvement plan that is devel-oped by the local school council,reviewed by a state advisory committee,and approved by the State Board ofEducation (SBE).

In 1991, the Oregon Educational Actfor the 21st Century was passed. Thisstatute greatly expands the use ofwaivers and provides a visionary frame-work for systemic school improvement.As part of this act, Oregon Benchmarkswere developed, and state-level task



force groups worked to established a 20-year strategic plan for the state's publiceducation system. Task force recom-mendations addressed the followingareas: certificates of initial mastery(CIM), certificates of advanced mastery(CAM), site-based decision making,non-graded primary education, middle-level education, alternative learningenvironments, school choice, the inte-gration of social services, an extendedschool day and year, and employmentopportunities for minors.

The Educational Act for the 21stCentury also established the SchoolImprovement and Professional Develop-ment Program, which encourages thefollowing measures: (1) the developmentof educational goals for individualschools and districts; (2) the assessmentof the educational progress of schoolprograms and students; (3) the expan-sion of professional growth and careeropportunities for Oregon teachers; (4)the restructuring of the school work-place to provide teachers with responsi-bilities and authority commensurate withtheir status as professionals; (5) thedevelopment and coordination of pilotprograms to evaluate the viability ofproposed rules, policies, or recommen-dations that affect professional practicesassociated with teaching methods, cur-ricula, instructional materials, instruc-tional format and organization, assess-ment, and related testing; and (6) theidentification of validated educational

research used to substantiate the ratio-nale for initiating pilot programs. Inaddition, the changes in classroomsresulting from the Oregon EducationalAct for the 21st Century have systemati-cally impacted the type of trainingrequired of classroom teachers, theprograms through which they are pre-pared, and the requirements forcredentialing.


As part of the School Improvementand Professional Development Program,Oregon's overall vision for teacherprofessional development is currentlybeing redefined. The Oregon TeachersStandards and Practices Commission,the Oregon State Department of Educa-tion (referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA), public andprivate colleges and universities, andstatewide professional organizationshave been working together since 1991to redesign Oregon's teaching, counsel-ing, and administrator licensure systemto align more closely with the develop-mental level of students. Tied directly tolicensure, a key element of the redesignis professional development for bothnew teachers and Oregon's existingteaching workforce. Work is currentlyunderway to define both the quantity ofcontinuing education that will be re-quired as well as those activities that will

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polio, Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polio,- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

153

qualify for continuing education credit.The specifics of the professional devel-opment plan, which requires both thelegislature's and the Commission's ap-proval, is scheduled for adoption inMarch of 1997.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheOregon Teachers Standards and Prac-tices Commission was established bystatute in 1965 to advise the SBE oncertification, teacher and administratorpreparation programs, and teacher jobperformance. In 1973, the legislatureconferred complete and exclusive au-thority to the Standards and PracticesCommission for teacher certification,teacher education programs, and themaintenance of professional standards.The Commission is entirely supportedby fees and has made a number of policychanges affecting teacher preparation,among which are increased requirementsfor admission to teacher educationprograms through higher program stan-dards; increased requirements for licen-sure through basic skills, subject-matter,and professional knowledge tests; re-quirements of pupil work samples duringstudent teaching; requiring state andFBI fingerprint checks; and the develop-ment and field testing of a beginning-teacher assessment and professionaldevelopment program.

Current licensure regulations stipu-late that, upon completion of all preservicerequirements, teachers are issued a BasicTeaching License that is valid for threeyears. The Standard License is valid forfive years and is issued to teachers withthree years of at least half-time teachingexperience upon the completion of amaster's degree or 45 quarter hours ofupper-division or graduate courseworkbeyond the bachelor's. One-third of thecredits must be in teacher education,with a focus on diagnostic, prescriptive,and evaluative techniques; research;guidance and counseling; and advancedinstruction in reading appropriate to thecandidate's endorsement, assignment,and previous preparation. Both basicand standard licenses are renewable withone full year (180 days) of satisfactoryteacher experience during the life of thelicense, or with nine quarter hours ofcourseworkor a combination of both

2

(one quarter hour equals 20 days).Secondary level teachers may renew abasic license on a one-time basis, with 24quarter hours of upper-divisioncoursework toward a Standard TeachingLicense.

Legislation was passed in 1987enacting the Oregon Beginning TeacherSupport Program (BTSP). BTSP activi-ties were piloted during the 1987-88school year and funded statewide from1991-93. Fiscal cutbacks in the SEA' sbudget have eliminated funds for thisprogram.

The Standards and Practices Com-mission has proposed changes inlicensure regulations to include an initiallicense, which would be held by ateacher for three years and renewableonce, and a continuing license, whichwould be renewable every five yearsbased on experience and continuingeducation. The Commission has pro-posed a professional development re-quirement that would be designedaccording to the instructional needsreflected in student achievement data.

State-Supported Programs. In1994, the SEA implemented a regionalstrategy with the regional EducationalService Districts (ESDs) to help schoolsimplement the Oregon Educational Actfor the 21st Century. Oregon's 36 coun-ties are divided into nine regions, and ateam of SEA staff is assigned to workwith ESDs and local districts. Theseteams support school and districtprofessional development needs byproviding technical assistance and de-livering training workshops, particularlyfor the Certificate of Initial MasteryAssessment, the Certificate of Ad-vanced Mastery, curriculum frameworks,alternative learning environments, spe-cial needs students, and school improve-ment planning.

The SEA sponsored a summerinstitute in August of 1996, entitled"Teaching and Learning in a Standards-Based System." The four-day instituteprovided training in standards-basedinstruction. Workshop sessions weredesigned around content areas andintroduced the concepts of authenticassessment design and application.Institute participants are now working at

the district level to orient and train theircolleagues in standards-based curricu-lum development and instructional tech-niques. Over 200 teachers attended thefirst institute. The SEA has remained incontact with institute graduates, provid-ing them with materials and assistance.Follow-up training has been proposedfor the summer of 1997.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. In 1995-96, Oregon awarded12 Goals 2000 subgrants to districts andESDs. Over 50 percent of the schools inthe state received Goals 2000 grants toimplement school improvement strate-gies that help all students reach thestandards incorporated in the state'sCertificates of Initial Mastery andAdvanced Mastery. Professional devel-opment is a key element in most of thesegrant activities.

In 1995, Oregon received $1.2 millionfrom the U.S. Department of Educationas a three-year grant to developstandards for English, history, geogra-phy, civics, foreign languages, and thearts. Oregon formed a Content Stan-dards Development Team to help pro-duce the standards based on successfulmodels. The project also includes de-signing and testing a model professionaldevelopment program for teachers.


State Funds. Oregon first begantargeting funds for professional devel-opment in 1993. An initial allocation of$6 million in grants-in-aid was awardedto schools on a competitive basis, andnearly half of all the schools in the statereceived funding. During the 1995-96school year, $1 million in funds wasallocated to schools that had notreceived prior funding for school-basedprofessional development. The ESDsreceived $57.4 million from the stateduring the 1995-96 school year. How-ever, most funding support for ESDs isgenerated by local property taxes.

Federal Funds. Oregon receivedGoals 2000 funds totaling $1,046,640 in1994, $4,012,392 in 1995, and $3,803,352in 1996. The federal Eisenhower (Title

VI) grant, which totaled $2,137,351 in1995-96, also provides a major source offunding for professional development.

Local Funds. Districts are requiredto pay service fees for some ESD-sponsored professional developmentprograms. Although local districts havehistorically funded professional devel-opment, very tight budgets have re-stricted the flow of monies that sup-ported these activities. In 1991, schoolfunding formulas changed, placing moreof the financial burden on the state.


Oregon's 21st Century School Act,which established the School Improve-ment and Professional DevelopmentProgram, clearly indicates the state'sbelief that professional development isan integral part of the school improve-ment process. This vision includes thestipulation that every school will have a21st Century Schools Council respon-sible for the development of plans toimprove the professional growth ofschool staff and the administration ofgrants-in-aid for the professional devel-opment of teachers and of classifieddistrict employees. Teacher representa-tion is required on the Councils.

The SEA reviews school improve-ment and professional developmentplans and recommends their approval tothe SBE. District improvement plansmust include the district's short-termand long-term goals for staff develop-ment and must also include provisionsfor partnerships with business, labor,and other groups that will affordworkplace-based professional develop-ment opportunities for educational staff.

A state provision allows districts toallocate up to 30 hours (or 5 days) ofprofessional development per schoolyear.


Teacher salaries and advancementoptions are determined locally. Profes-sional development is a permissive area

for bargaining, and policies and prac-tices vary from district to district.Compensation and/or reimbursement forprofessional development activities areoffered to teachers in some cases.


There are no professional develop-ment schools operating in the state ofOregon. Institutions of higher educationsupport professional developmentthrough their course offerings. For themost part, professional developmentservices are provided by ESDs, privateconsultants hired through the district,and the SEA.


Dave MytonExecutive DirectorOregon Teacher Standards and PracticesCommission255 Capitol Street NE, Suite 105Salem, OR 97310503-378-6813

Joanne FlintAssistant SuperintendentCurriculum, Instruction & Field ServicesOregon Department of Education255 Capitol Street NESalem, OR 97310503-378-8004, ext. 259

Jim CarnesDirectorSchool Board Leadership and SchoolImprovementOregon School Boards AssociationP.O. Box 1068Salem, OR 97308503-588-2800


1D)





3


PennsylvaniaEducation Policy Context

pennsylvania's public educationpolicy is driven by local control.However, state support for educa-

tion represents 46 percent of the state'sbudget and 38 percent of total schooldistrict revenues. State aid is distributedusing an equalization formula that takesthe wealth and revenue-raising ability ofdistricts into consideration. A lawsuitchallenging the constitutionality of theschool finance law was filed in 1991 by agroup of rural and urban districts. Inresponse to this case (which is stillpending), Governor Tom Ridge createdan Advisory Commission on PublicSchool Finance in October of 1995 toreview finance policies and providerecommendations for improvement. Thenine-member Commission reviewed courtcase documents, as well as state andnational reports, and held public hear-ings. In May of 1996, the Commissionreleased its final report, which empha-sized that equity in school financeshould be a function of instructionalprogram quality, not actual dollar alloca-tions.

The Commission recommends theestablishment of a core curriculum thatidentifies the components of a "thor-ough and efficient" education system,which the state is constitutionallycharged to provide. Once established,state aid would be distributed using afoundation funding formula that ensures



each district the level of funding nec-essary to implement the core program.The report further states that academicstandards must be developed and linkedto an assessment system that will"measure whether the students ofPennsylvania are provided access to aquality core educational program." Ahigh-stakes accountability system thatwould reward or sanction districts basedon student performance is also proposedfor consideration in the report. ThePennsylvania Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) is currentlydeveloping a program of academicstandards. A legislative mandate (SB1352) calls for the creation of anEducation Standards Commission tooversee public hearings on the stan-dards and issue final recommendationsto the Pennsylvania State Board ofEducation (SBE) and the legislature byNovember of 1996.


The SEA issued professional devel-opment standards in 1989. The stan-dards are used to approve the profes-sional development plans that arerequired of all districts. Only SEA-approved activities can be used tosatisfy the continuing professional de-velopment requirements that are linkedto teacher certification.

Most policies affecting teacherprofessional growth are embedded in theSBE Chapter 49 regulations regardingthe certification of professional person-nel, which set forth all requirementspertaining to teacher licensure. Theseregulations undergo extensive reviewevery ten years, and the most recentround occurred in 1995. In issuing itscharge to the Chapter 49 review commit-tee, the SBE stated, "What matters mostnow is what teachers know and can do,not how much time they spend inpreparation or how many courses theycomplete." Proposed Chapter 49 revi-sions focus heavily on professionaldevelopment (see the box on page 2).The SBE granted preliminary approval ofthe revisions in July of 1996.

Teacher Certification Policies.Pennsylvania has used a two-tier systemof teacher certification for many years.Upon successful completion of allpreservice requirements (including anapproved preparation program and thepassing of four tests), teacher candi-dates are issued a six-year Instructional ICertificate. Since 1987, Instructional I-certified teachers have been required toparticipate in a locally designed andfunded induction program. SEA guide-lines require that induction programs: (1)be related to the district's strategic planfor learner outcomes; (2) be based onteachers' needs as identified through anongoing assessment process; (3) pro-vide new teachers with a mentor support

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.


Pennsylvania Professional Development (PD) Standards

PD must have significant intellectual and practical content, the primary objective of which is to improve the participants'professional competence.

PD must deal with matters directly related to subjects which satisfy the purposes of the professional development plan.

PD must be organized and led by persons qualified with the practical or academic experience necessary to conduct theactivity or experience effectively.

PD must be approved as professional activities and experience by the continuing professional development committee ofthe school entity.

team; and (4) include a program evalua-tion component. The minimum length ofthe induction program is one year; localsystems have the option of designingprograms of longer duration. The goal ofthe induction program is to providesupport for beginning teachers, and it isnot intended for evaluative use. Instruc-tional Level I teachers must alsoparticipate in continuing professionaldevelopment activities as provided bythe district.

An Instructional II Certificate isissued to teachers who have completedan SEA-approved induction program,can demonstrate three years of teachingexperience, and have accrued 24 credithours of post-baccalaureate or state-approved, in-service study. The Instruc-tional II Certificate is sometimes called apermanent certificate; there are norecertification requirements assigned toInstructional II level teachers at this time.However, recently proposed legislativeinitiatives (SB 1410) would modifyChapter 49 and require Instructional IIpersonnel to complete nine collegecredits and 270 clock hours of district-approved, in-service activities (or acombination of both). Master's levelteachers' renewal requirements would besix college credits or 180 clock hours.Certificate renewal would be requiredevery five years. Proposed Chapter 49revisions also include a provision thatwould grant National Board Certifiedteachers automatic Level II certificationstatus.

Teaching certificates are issued bythe Bureau of Teacher Preparation andCertification, an operating unit of the

2

SEA Office of Higher Education. TheBureau also conducts the teachereducation program approval processand monitors local staffing practices toensure that they do not violate theSchool Code. The Pennsylvania Profes-sional Standards and Practices Commis-sion is responsible for designing thestate code for professional' conduct andadjudication for disciplinary cases re-lated to teacher certification. The Com-mission plays an advisory role to theSBE on matters affecting policies forteacher certification and teacher prepara-tion program approval. Its membershipis comprised of seven classroom teach-ers, three administrators, a teachereducation program representative, andtwo community residents.

State-Supported Programs. Penn-sylvania has 18 intermediate units (IUs)which provide professional develop-ment and other technical assistanceservices to districts located in theirrespective service areas. Renderingprofessional development for teachersthrough the Ms reflects the state'scurrent teacher professional develop-ment delivery model. However, thePennsylvania Teacher Leadership In-itiative (eliminated in the fall of 1996 aspart of budget cutbacks) was consideredby many to be a successful and morecomprehensive approach to promotingteacher professional growth.

Created in 1988, the philosophy ofthe Teacher Leadership Initiative was tosupport "teachers who, while maintain-ing their role as classroom teachers, areselected and choose to accept additionalresponsibility for assisting other teach-

ers, either individually or in teams, toimprove their professional effective-ness." To this end, the SEA establishednine Teacher Leadership Centers (TLCs)across the state to implement profes-sional development programs that pro-mote teacher leadership. Each TLC wasgoverned by a local board, which wascomposed of a majority of classroomteachers and included administratorsand university/college professors. Gov-erning boards were responsible fordeveloping the TLC's mission, settingannual objectives, and managing fiscalmatters. Housed in a variety of settings(i.e., school districts, intermediate units,consortia, and universities), TLCs werestaffed by a director and often con-tracted out for services. While each TLCprogram was customized to meet theneeds of districts in their region, a StateAdvisory Board guided their work, andan SEA coordinator worked with direc-tors to help integrate training onstatewide reforms in curriculum andassessment and to develop an overrid-ing mission and goals statement.

The TLCs sponsored an annualstatewide Teacher Leadership Confer-ence, which attracted approximately 300teachers. The Centers also publishedThe Pennsylvania Journal of TeacherLeadership, which featured articleswritten by teachers, and distributed it toevery school in the state. TeacherLeadership Initiative activities werefunded by a state appropriation. Over15,000 Pennsylvania teachers weretrained annually for Teacher Leadershiproles during the seven years that thisinitiative was active.

Governor Ridge has introduced aneducational technology initiative en-titled "Project Link to Learn." The three-year, $121-million initiative is intended toadvance instructional technology in theclassroom and create the PennsylvaniaEducation Network (PEN), a comprehen-sive telecommunications system linkingschool districts and public highereducation institutions. In the first yearof this initiative, activities will focus oncomputer equipment purchases, up-grades, and teacher training on theintegration of technology into coursecurricula instruction.

The SEA administers an on-demandwriting assessment to sixth and ninthgraders. The primary objectives of thePennsylvania Writing Assessment areto present a curriculum overview basedupon student writing performance and toencourage teachers to incorporate thetechniques of writing assessment (dis-covery drafting, revision, editing, andpublishing) into their regular classroominstruction. A state advisory boardcomprised of teachers, administrators,and higher education representativeshelped to develop this assessment andcontinue to guide its refinement. Since1991, thousands of teachers have beentrained as scorers, a function thatprovides them with staff development.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Pennsylvania distributes itsGoals 2000 funding through subgrantsthat are awarded to districts, intermedi-ate units, and vocational/technicalschools. During the 1995-96 school year,57 Goals 2000 subgrant recipientsreported that a portion of their fundswere used for professional development.

The School District of Philadelphiais working in partnership with theChildren Achieving Challenge to imple-ment standards-based reform and sys-temic restructuring. Created in 1995, thispartnership is supported through a grantfrom the Annenberg Foundation andmatching support from other public andprivate funders, totaling $150 millionover five years.


State Funds. The state does notprovide categorical funding for profes-sional development. State funds tosupport the IUs total $5.5 million peryear. Project Link funds are awardedthrough competitive grants and average$16 per student. The Teacher Leader-ship Initiative received $1.4 millionannually; funding support for thisinitiative was eliminated as of the 1996-97school year.

Federal Funds. Pennsylvania re-ceived a $10.6-million Eisenhower Pro-fessional Development grant for the1995-96 school year. Officials report thatfederal funds obtained through sourcessuch as Title I and Special Educationprovide the bulk of resource support fordistrict-level professional developmentactivities.

Local Funds. Districts are requiredto implement a professional develop-ment and teacher induction plan. How-ever, no state funds are allocated tosupport these activities. As a result, thequality and quantity of district profes-sional development activities are afunction of the resources availablewithin local budgets.


Act 178, passed in 1982, representsPennsylvania's primary mandate in thearea of professional development. Act178 requires each district to establish a"continuing professional developmentplanning committee" composed of ad-ministrators and teachers to design aprofessional development plan that isupdated and submitted every two yearsto the SEA' s Division of School BasedImprovement for approval. SEA guide-lines stipulate that district professionaldevelopment plans be designed toaddress needs at the district, school, andindividual levels. Plans must describethe types of professional developmentactivities to be conducted, which maycover a range of activities, includinggraduate-level coursework, SEA-ap-

153

proved in-service activities, curriculumdevelopment work, peer observations,and professional conferences or work-shops. The professional developmentplan mandate has been in effect state-wide since the 1988-89 school year.

In addition to the professionaldevelopment plan, districts must alsodesign and implement an induction planand a strategic plan. Chapter 49revisions, preliminarily approved in Julyof 1996, stipulate that parents andcommunity representatives should haveinput in developing these plans and thatthe various planning processes shouldbe coordinated and be complementary infocus.


Teacher salaries are determinedthrough local bargaining agreements.Most districts provide step increases fordegrees earned. Some districts allowmovement on the salary scale forteachers who obtain a "master's equiva-lency," which represents an accumula-tion of approved in-service credit that isrewarded with the same increase awardedfor a master's degree. One in-servicecredit (for every 15 hours of in-service) isequivalent to one semester hour. Profes-sional development issues (e.g., tuitionreimbursement and in-service days) arenegotiated through teachers' contracts.

Until recently, state law allowed anypublic school employee, after ten yearsof service, to take "sabbatical leave" (at50 percent of their salary rate) for thepurposes of health, education, or travel.Since the 1940s, teachers have usededucation and travel sabbaticals for thepurpose of pursuing professional growthexperiences. Education sabbaticals aregranted for participation in a structuredcourse of study. Travel sabbaticals may(at the discretion of local boards) requirean approval process that includessubmission of travel itinerary, descrip-tion of educational benefit to students,and, upon return, follow-up reports andlesson plan materials. It is estimated that5,000 teachers take sabbatical leave foreducation and travel purposes eachyear.

Estimates of the annual cost of thesabbatical leave program have made it ahotly debated topic. The sabbaticalleave law was amended by the Senate inJune of 1996 (Act 66-1996). Sabbaticalsfor health restoration continue to be anentitled mandate; sabbaticals for studywere replaced with leaves of absence forprofessional development (subject todistrict approval) and require minimumgraduate and/or undergraduate creditsand/or hours of "professional develop-ment activities." The act eliminatestravel sabbaticals.


The Pennsylvania State EducationAssociation (PSEA) offers an extensivearray of professional development op-portunities. PSEA hosts an annual,three-day Education Conference that isattended by over 500 teachers. As aprecursor to their biannual delegateassembly meeting, PSEA brings 200 to500 teachers together to participate in aseries of 90-minute sessions on "criticalissues" that provide awareness of keyreforms affecting instructional practicein Pennsylvania and nationwide. ThePSEA began developing cadres oftrained teachers in 1991 to serve astrainers within Pennsylvania on issuespertaining to alternative assessment,strategic planning, inclusion, and otherareas. Seventy-five teachers participateas presenters. The PSEA also sponsorsa Summer Leadership Conference with aProfessional Issues School (a four-dayworkshop) and offers numerous coursesin conjunction with local colleges anduniversities.


Frederica F. HaasDirectorBureau of Teacher Preparation andCertificationPennsylvania Department of Education333 Market StreetHarrisburg, PA 17126-0333717-772-4737

Timothy H. DanielsExecutive Policy SpecialistPennsylvania Department of Education333 Market StreetHarrisburg, PA 17126-0333717-783-9781

Susan Spad aforeSchool Improvement LeadershipSpecialistPennsylvania Department of Education333 Market StreetHarrisburg, PA 17126-0333717-783-1830

Cordell AffeldtDirector of Professional ProgramsPennsylvania State EducationAssociation400 North Third StreetP.O. Box 1724Harrisburg, PA 17105-1724717-255-7028


Induction and Professional Develop-ment Guidelines. Pennsylvania Depart-ment of Education (May 1993).

The Pennsylvania Lead Teacher Pro-gram: 1992-93 Final Evaluation Re-port. Written by Marina Avi Piscolishfor the Pennsylvania Department ofEducation (October 1993).

The Profession of Teaching in Pennsyl-vania: A Report on Lead Teachers.Written by The Academy for Educa-tional Development for the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Education (May 1989).

"Testimony before the Basic EducationSubcommittee of the House EducationCommittee: Sabbatical Leaves." Submit-ted by David J. Gondak, PresidentPennsylvania State Education Associa-tion (December 5, 1995).


159





C RE


Rhode IslandEducation Policy Context

Rhode Island's 37 school districtsserve approximately 142,150children. Rhode Island has a

long-standing tradition of local controlover education. School districts aregoverned by locally elected schoolcommittees that determine school poli-cies and procedures. However, recentcourt cases have highlighted the state'sfundamental responsibility for educa-tion.

The strategic reform agenda of theRhode Island Board of Regents (thegoverning policy board for the RhodeIsland Department of Education) isfocused on: high standards and achieve-ment for all students; high-qualitymeasurement of student performance;school improvement through account-ability and professional development;integrated social services; and theequitable distribution of funding. Thisreform was affirmed and enhanced in therecently completed Rhode Island Goals2000 Comprehensive Education Strat-egy, which adds approaches to improveteaching and learning for all students,and to create responsive and supportivesystems.


In 1993, the Commissioner of Educa-tion established a Professional Develop-



ment Policy Consortium, consisting ofrepresentatives from the state chaptersof the American Federation of Teachersand the National Education Association,the University of Rhode Island, RhodeIsland College, the state Superinten-dents Association, and staff from theRhode Island Department of Education(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA). TheConsortium examines teacher certifica-tion and professional development is-sues. The Consortium's mission state-ment outlines its priorities as follows:

To develop an outcome-based sys-tem of professional preparation,certification, and life-long profes-sional development which focuseson the knowledge, dispositions,and performances required of alleducators to ensure an educationof the highest quality and theachievement of learning outcomesfor all our children.

The Consortium has concentratedon developing a standards-based ap-proach to teacher certification andrecertification, within a broader contextof systemic change and accountability.It charged a working group, consistingof representatives from its memberorganizations, which is drafting newstandards for beginning teachers. Theworking group is incorporating theInterstate New Teacher Assessment and

Support Consortium (INTASC) stan-dards for educators, and has startedpiloting some standards for beginningadministrators and teachers in threeschool sites. The sites have designatedteams of administrators and teacherswho will apply the INTASC standardsand subsequently report to the statewhat they believe beginning teachersand administrators should be able to do.However, there has been no agreementat the Consortium level regarding stan-dards-based recertification, even thoughthe Board of Regents eliminated lifecertification as of May of 1997, andcalled for a system of standards-based,performance-related recertification.

The Consortium has outlined itsguiding principles for teacher certifica-tion, preparation, and professional de-velopment as follows:

reflective of valid research, a broadknowledge base, and best practice;

based on standards of what educa-tors should know and be able to do;

responsive to the needs of teachers,administrators, schools, families,and communities;

linked to the needs of schools andschool improvement efforts;

rigorous;

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

160

acknowledging of various types andlevels of life experience;

interconnected to and supportive ofone another;

reflective of systemic change; and

concerned with preparing teachersto work in a diverse society and torespond to students' diverse back-grounds.

The Collaborative's guiding prin-ciples specifically for teacher profes-sional development are: it should becollaborative within schools, acrossschools and with higher education; itshould be a life-long responsibility of alleducators; and it should be based onshared responsibility and decision-making.

Teacher Certification Policies. Af-ter teachers are initially certified, theyreceive a provisional three-year certifi-cate, during which they must accrue sixcollege credits. After meeting thisrequirement, teachers receive a five-yearprofessional certificate. Within fiveyears, they must take nine credits, threeof which can be in-service activities orcontinuing education unit (CEU) credits.If they obtain a master's degree in theirteaching field and have six years ofteaching experience, they receive a lifecertificate. However, the Board ofRegents adopted an educational policyresolution in March of 1996 ending theissuance of life certificates by May of1997.

The state is developing a perfor-mance-based teacher preparation pro-gram leading to initial certification, butassessments based on the new stan-dards must be developed before deter-mining their implication for practicingteachers. The Rhode Island BeginningTeacher Standards will reflect whatevery teacher should know and be ableto do. Decisions regarding monitoring,evaluation and the continued employ-ment of teachers are made locally basedon collective bargaining.

The standard-setting activities ofthe Professional Development PolicyConsortium are likely to influence theway recertification is handled in Rhode

Island. State, teacher unions, forexample, are already advocating lan-guage in local contracts regardingNational Board Certification. The SEA isin agreement that Board Certificationshould constitute a comparable profes-sional certificate.

The second round of Goals 2000funding, awarded in January of 1996, setaside funds for the state's mentoringprogram for new teachers. The programoffers financial support to districts toprovide a veteran teacher mentor forbeginning teachers. Each district re-ceived approximately $10,000. The SEA,the two state teacher associations, andinstitutions of higher education devel-oped the Request for Proposals and thetraining plan of Mentor Resource Con-sultants for the pilot sites. Representa-tives of the pilot districts meet periodi-cally to share their progress, and hope todevelop a statewide mentor network.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA Office of Teacher Education andCertification has a staff position dedi-cated to teacher professional develop-ment. Closer links between schoolimprovement and professional develop-ment will be sought as the stateimplements initiatives related to itsoverall reform goals. Professionaldevelopment guidelines, initially devel-oped through a National Governors'Association grant, have been revisedand shared with local school districts.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedProjects. Schools applying for theRhode Island Goals 2000 Project fundsmust detail their plans for teacherprofessional development as a part oftheir larger School Improvement Plans.Participating schools are also required toform partnerships with institutions ofhigher education to assist in thedevelopment and implementation of theirSchool Improvement Plans.


State Funds. No state funds areallocated for teacher professional devel-opment in Rhode Island. Most fundingthat flows through the state for localprofessional development is Goals 2000money, which is distributed through a

dl

competitive grant process. The statedoes offer workshops, typically sup-ported by a combination of federal andstate money, in priority areas such asframeworks and performance assess-ments.

Federal Funds. In FY 1995, RhodeIsland received $1,243,473 in federalEisenhower funding. The Goals 2000initiative has provided resources tosupport districts and schools as theyimplement reform activities. In year one(1994-95), 26 projects were funded for atotal of $473,072: Goals 2000 fundingprovided $210,999; state funds provided$238,573; and federal Chapter I fundsprovided $23,500. In year two (1995-96),35 districts, schools, and educationalcollaboratives received awards totaling$1,554,696. Goals 2000 funding provided$1,254,696; the Rhode Island Founda-tion provided $100,000; and the RhodeIsland Human Resource InvestmentCouncil provided $200,000.

Local Funds. Some districts providelocal dollars to support professionaldevelopment, but the support is gener-ally quite limited. Local dollars expendedon teacher professional developmentseem to be the first eliminated in times ofbudget constraints.


There are no state mandates ofschool districts regarding teacher pro-fessional development other than theschool-based teacher professional de-velopment plans required by Goals 2000contracts.

The state does not mandate aminimum number of days set aside forlocal professional development. RhodeIsland has a 180-day instructional year,which includes two days that districtscan petition the state to use forprofessional development. The Commis-sioner would like to require that all 180days be used for instructional purposesand add five days to the school calendarfor professional development, but thiswould necessitate additional state fundsto extend the school year. The statedoes not mandate any local budgetallocation for professional development.

The primary providers of profes-sional development services for RhodeIsland's teachers are the state's institu-tions of higher learning, the AnnenbergInstitute, private consultants, SEA per-sonnel, and fellow practitioners. Thestate is encouraging districts to imple-ment school-based management, includ-ing decisions about professional devel-opment. Professional developmentproviders vary by school and, in the caseof the Goals 2000 districts, are chosenaccording to the needs specified inSchool Improvement Plans.


Collective bargaining for profes-sional development is not permitted atthe state level. Teachers negotiate on adistrict-by-district basis for salary incre-ments awarded for professional develop-ment activities and for other provisions,such as stipends. They bargain for in-service days beyond the 180 instruc-tional days dictated by state law. Thestate previously allowed five of the 180days for professional development butthis has been discontinued.

Teachers are not currently awardedsalary increments for National BoardCertification, but the state's teachers'organizations are seeking language inlocal contracts that would provideincreased compensation for teacherswho receive Board Certification. Mostteachers are not reimbursed for the costsassociated with professional develop-ment activities. Contract negotiationsfocus primarily on salary increments.


Both the Rhode Island TeachersAssociation and the Rhode IslandFederation of Teachers (RIFT) holdconferences and workshops for theirmembers. The two groups activelyrepresent teachers' interests on profes-sional development to the Board ofRegents and other state agencies. RIFTis involved in the AFT EducationalResearch and Dissemination project: one

component of which provides practitio-ners with current research on mathteaching; another component focuseson training local practitioners, particu-larly new teachers, in effective classroomtechniques; and another helps teachersto communicate and increase parent andfamily involvement.

The Rhode Island Mathematics andScience Coalition works with corpora-tions, such as AT&T and Bell Labs, toprovide summer internships through theTeacher and Industry program. Teachershave the opportunity to work in industryand learn how what they teach applies tothe workplace.

Rhode Island institutions of highereducation are apparently the state'slargest providers of teacher professionaldevelopment and technical assistance.The Goals 2000 initiative requires dis-tricts to form partnerships with institu-tions of higher education to addresstheir School Improvement Plans. Four-teen districts received grants from thestate for professional development stra-tegic planning; all of these districts areworking with Professional DevelopmentSchools. There are three university-sponsored professional developmentschools in the state. The University ofRhode Island and Rhode Island Collegemaintain partnerships with local schooldistricts. The Geography Alliance is ahigher education initiative working withclassroom teachers. Five regionalcollaboratives, each working with up toeight school districts, provide confer-ences or workshops in conjunction withan area institution of higher education.The capacity of the five collaboratives,however, varies greatly.

The state School-to-Work Commit-tee has held conferences for teachersregarding school-to-work transition. TheAssociation for Supervision and Cur-riculum Development and the WorkingWonders Network work with teachers.The Critical Friends Group, whichemerged from the Coalition for EssentialSchools Initiative, provides a practitio-ner-to-practitioner support group. TheInstitute for Labor Studies and Researchis a private group focused on workplaceliteracy that runs programs in local highschools and provides teacher work-shops.

162


Susan LimaProfessional Development SpecialistRhode Island Department of Education22 Hayes StreetProvidence, RI 02908401-277-2046

Gloria HowardAssistant TreasurerRhode Island Teachers Association15C Olney StreetProvidence, RI 02906401-463-9630

Colleen MileckiDirector of Professional IssuesRhode Island Federation of Teachers356 Smith StreetProvidence, RI 02908401-273-9800






3

S S. S

South Carolina


South Carolina's public K-12system is comprised of 1,106schools, which serve an ever-

increasing population of more than600,000 students. Early education reformefforts, initiated during the 1970s and1980s, were highly regulatory in nature,giving the South Carolina Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) centralauthority over instructional activities atthe local level. At the height of this era,the Education Improvement Act (EIA) of1984 was considered to be the mostcomprehensive education package everenacted in the state. This legislationsought to increase student achievementby emphasizing basic skills, state-supported remedial and compensatoryeducation, preschool and kindergartenprograms, and other elements to improveequity and address the fundamentalproblems of predominantly minority andpoor school districts. EIA also wasinstrumental in promoting linkages be-tween professional growth opportuni-ties and school reform, providing morethan $1 million to support professionaldevelopment.

The 1990 elections brought changesto South Carolina's political landscape,creating an infusion of new leadershipand direction from the Governor's



House, the General Assembly, and theState Superintendent's Office. Thestate's new wave of education reformemphasizes "total quality education,"which is the underlying premise of the1993 Early Childhood and AcademicAssistance Act 135. Act 135 promotesdecentralization, school-based goal set-ting, and professional preparation anddevelopment. Each district and school isrequired to develop a long-range strate-gic plan for improvement that includes aprofessional development component toassist staff in meeting identified goals.The SEA has refocused its servicemission from that of regulator to one ofresource provider, while districts andschools have assumed greater responsi-bility for control and decision makingregarding their educational programs.

The State Board of Education (SBE)began working to establish curriculumframeworks in 1992, which were formallyadopted in 1993 for the areas ofmathematics, performing and visual arts,and foreign languages. Frameworkdevelopment involved SEA staff, teach-ers, administrators, political and busi-ness leaders, parents, and other commu-nity members. The frameworks serve asa guide for state policy, program andresource allocation, professional devel-opment, school organization, and stu-dent assessment.


In 1993, the SEA operationalized avision for professional growth throughthe Assisting, Developing and Evalua-tion of Professional Teaching (ADEPT)program. The goal of ADEPT is toimprove student learning by ensuringthat teachers are knowledgeable, highlyskilled, and committed to continuousprofessional growth. ADEPT measuresteaching skills in ten performancedimensions: (1) long-range planning; (2)short-range instructional planning; (3)use of assessments; (4) establishinghigh expectations for all students; (5)using instructional strategies; (6) pro-viding content; (7) monitoring andenhancing learning; (8) maintaining anenvironment for learning; (9) managingthe classroom; and (10) fulfilling profes-sional responsibilities outside the class-room. The performance dimensions aredesigned to reflect South Carolina'scurriculum frameworks as well as theteaching standards identified by theInterstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium (INTASC) and theNational Board for Professional Teach-ing Standards (NBPTS).

ADEPT provides the framework forteacher education program approval,teacher evaluations, and ongoing pro-fessional development activities. Since



163

the fall of 1993, ADEPT has been pilotedin 16 districts, and statewide implementa-tion is expected by the 1997-98 schoolyear.

Teacher Certification Policies. Cur-rently, first-year teachers are issued aone-year provisional contract. In 1993,the SEA pilot tested beginning teacherinduction programs to encourage dis-trict-level activity in this area. The SEAdeveloped guidelines recommendingthat, during their provisional year, newteachers should participate in an orienta-tion program and receive mentoring andcoaching support at the building level.Specific designs and implementationstrategies for induction programs aredetermined at the local level. Uponcompleting one full year of teaching, ateacher is eligible to receive a standardcertificate that is renewable every fiveyears. There are different levels of thestandard certificate, depending on thehighest degree earned by a teacher.Requirements for renewal at each levelare the same; a teacher must complete 6semester hours of college course creditevery five years. A portion of teachers'study (one-half) must be related to theircontent areas.

Once ADEPT is implemented state-wide in the fall of 1997, revised teachercertification policies will be in effect.Under the new policy, second-yearteachers will be issued an annualcontract for up to two years. During thistime, annual contract teachers must passan ADEPT performance evaluation be-fore advancing to continuing contractstatus. Unlike the former teacherevaluation process, ADEPT's evalua-tion embodies more than classroomobservations. The evaluation includesdata collected throughout the year onlesson plans and student work tocapture the overall quality of teacherperformance. Such performance-basedmodels of evaluation help to promoteongoing professional development forcontinuing contract teachers. Schoolprincipals receive SEA-sponsored evalu-ator training in the ADEPT model.Teachers who fail the evaluation aftertheir third year are not eligible to teach inSouth Carolina for a minimum of twoyears, after which they may re-enter thesystem at the provisional contract level.

Those who pass receive a continuingcontract license.

The continuing contract is a five-year, renewable license. Continuingcontract teachers are required to partici-pate in ADEPT through either a forma-tive or summative evaluation process.Districts may elect to use one or bothmethods of evaluation. The summativeevaluation consists of the same proce-dures used to evaluate annual contractteachers (i.e., classroom observationsand collection of student work). Underthe formative evaluation process, teach-ers must identify a minimum of threegoals for professional growth anddevelopment in following areas: teach-ing content/subject matter, instructionalstrategies or assessment, and extracur-ricular or professional service. Districtsare responsible for determining successcriteria and monitoring procedures forthe formative evaluation. Continuingcontract teachers must participate in anADEPT evaluation at least once everythree years; however, performance re-sults will not affect their contract status.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA Office of Professional Developmentserves to improve student learning by:aligning professional development withresearch and standards, providing effi-cient services to schools and districts,evaluating professional developmentactivities, and providing data-drivenprofessional development. The officewas reorganized in 1995 into twosections, which are staffed by "educa-tion associates" who are assigned to oneof six district/school clusters locatedacross the state.

The Schools and District Assis-tance/Brokering section operates as a"broker" of resources and is able torespond to site-specific needs forservices and information as requested.This section is responsible for approv-ing and coordinating all training activi-ties conducted by the SEA and forevaluating their effectiveness. Allproposed SEA-sponsored professionaldevelopment must meet the followingguidelines (modeled after the NationalStaff Development Council standards) inorder to be approved for implementation.These guidelines stipulate that profes-sional development training:

1C4

is based upon an assessment ofparticipant needs;

is consistent with organizationallong-range plans;

takes into account the climatenecessary for the change process tooccur, including the initiation,implementation,and institutionaliza-tion phases;

establishes a rationale based uponcurrent research and best practice;

emphasizes active participant in-volvement in the learning processand utilizes a variety of instructionalapproaches;

includes exhibitions (demonstrat-ions) of the skills;

provides adequate practice to refinethe skills;

employs a feedback mechanism forindividual participants;

provides adequate follow-up activi-ties to ensure skill development;

includes evaluation procedureswhich assess long-term profes-sional growth; and,

promotes and applies team skills inplanning and implementing profes-sional development activities.

The SEA' s Leadership Academysection provides training seminarsthroughout the year that are attended byschool-based teams. The Academyoffers Professional Development Insti-tutes to assist participants in acquiringthe knowledge, skills, and techniquesthat are necessary to successfullyimplement major education initiativesoperating in the state. Each year, severalinstitutes are offered, consisting of aseries of seminars scheduled over thecourse of the school year. The Academyseminars focus on leadership develop-ment in the areas of oral communication,management skills, instructional leader-ship skills, and school improvement.

SEA staff determine institute topicsbased on an annual statewide needsassessment and a review of professionaldevelopment interests, as identified indistrict-level strategic plans. Participa-tion in SEA-sponsored professionaldevelopment activities is optional; how-ever, teachers interested in becomingcertified in technology preparation mustattend state-sponsored workshops inthis area. Institute activities are offeredfree of charge.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Since 1993, the SEA hasmanaged South Carolina's StatewideSystemic Initiative (SSI) under thegovernance of the Governor's Math-ematics and Sciences Advisory Board.SSI activities are operationali zed through13 regional mathematics and sciencehubs located throughout the state. Eachhub consists of a network of schoolrepresentatives, higher education insti-tutions, local businesses, and othercommunity members. Hubs operateunder the direction of a regionaladvisory committee and exist to providedistricts and schools with professionaldevelopment and other services toimprove math and science instruction inalignment with the state curriculumframeworks.

The South Carolina Education Goals2000 Panel has identified "teachereducation and professional develop-ment" as one of its top five educationimprovement priorities. For the 1995-96year, 32 districts have received Goals2000 grants to implement professionaldevelopment as outlined in their localstrategic plans.


State Funds. Since 1984, the EIAhas provided over $3.1 million annuallyto support teacher professional develop-ment, and, despite recent budget cuts inthis area, state support remains strong.Districts receive flow-through funds forprofessional development based on

student enrollment and average dailyattendance. Two major teacher develop-ment initiatives, the Commission onHigher Education's Centers of Excel-

lence and the South Carolina Center forthe Advancement of Teaching, aresupported through EIA. The ADEPTprogram received $250,000 for 1994-95pilot activities; however, additionalfunds will be needed to supportexpanded implementation over the nexttwo years.

Federal Funds. Approximately$96,000 of the state's Goals 2000 fundshave been allocated for professionaldevelopment activities at the local level.South Carolina received a $3.3-millionEisenhower Professional Developmentgrant for the 1995-96 school year. Thestate's SSI activities are supportedthrough a five-year, $9.6-million grantfrom the National Science Foundation.

Local Funds. The EIA requiresdistricts to allocate $10 per certified FTEfor professional development.


Since 1984, districts have beenrequired to submit a five-year strategicplan that is updated annually. Act 135strengthened this process by mandatingthe creation of school improvementcouncils to ensure building-level align-ment with district goals. Act 135 alsoidentified staff development as a re-quired component of the strategic plan.The law states that each district "mustprovide staff development to prepareand train teachers and administrators inthe teaching techniques and strategiesto implement their District StrategicPlans." Ten days are incorporated in theschool year calendar for professionaldevelopment, five at the district level andfive at the school level.

District plans are submitted to andmonitored by the state. School-levelrenewal plans are also developed but arenot state-monitored. Each districtdesignates a staff development coordi-nator, who participates in SEA-spon-sored training or meetings and isresponsible for the coordination andassessment of district-level trainingactivities. SEA staff are available toassist and provide resources to districtsupon request.

165


South Carolina is a right-to-workstate, making collective bargaining ille-gal. Teachers' salaries are based on thestate's minimum salary schedule, whichprovides step increases for additionalcollege credits or degrees earned and forthe number of years of teaching. Salaryincrements are awarded at the rate of$200 per year during each of the first 17years of teaching service. This incre-ment is decreased to $100 for 18 to 25years of service, and no annual increaseis awarded to teachers with beyond 25years of service. Teachers may receivestipends, paid for by SEA or districtfunds, for participation in summer staffdevelopment activities. Original EIAlegislation provided tuition reimburse-ment for college courses successfullycompleted, with a limit of one courseevery two years. However, this appro-priation was rescinded during the 1995legislative session as part of thereductions made in the EIA budget.


The South Carolina Education As-sociation (SCEA) sponsors a two-daystate convention each March. The 1995convention, attended by approximately1,000 teachers, offered 33 workshopscovering 15 to 20 different topic areas.The SCEA is currently designing re-gional workshops that will be imple-mented for the first time during the 1996-97 school year. The purpose of theregional workshops are to make SCEA-sponsored training events more acces-sible to members who are unable toattend the annual convention and tocustomize training topics to match localneeds and interests. SCEA leaders arehoping to form partnerships with dis-tricts in this effort and to utilize local in-service days to promote greater teacherparticipation.

The EIA funds dispersed to theCommission on Higher Education sup-port the Centers of Excellence initiative,which began with one site in 1987 and

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

currently involves eight centers locatedat six higher education institutions. Thecenters serve as "state-of-the-art" re-source teacher preparation programsthat develop model programs, conductresearch, disseminate information, andprovide training for K-12 and highereducation personnel. Any South Caro-lina public or private college that isauthorized by the SBE to offer teachereducation programs is eligible to applyto host a center. Upon approval from theCommission, a center is funded for twoyears, contingent on the availability offunds, with the expectation of renewalfor a second two-year cycle. TheUniversity of South Carolina housesthree centers: Assessment of StudentLearning, Middle Level Initiatives, andSpecial Education Technology. ClemsonUniversity has centers in Mathematicsand Science Education and Rural SpecialEducation. Each of the following sitesoperate one center: Furman Universityhouses a Foreign Language Instructioncenter, Coastal Carolina University hasan English Composition center, and theCollege of Charleston administers theAccelerated Learning center.

The Center for the Advancement ofTeaching and School Leadership wasestablished at Winthrop University in1989 and then relocated to the Universityof South Carolina in 1995. The Centerprovides technical assistance and fund-ing support to schools involved inrestructuring. Currently, there are 100schools involved in the Center's activi-ties. Recently, the Center assumedresponsibility for coordinating profes-sional development school sites, bring-ing together five universities and col-leges: the University of South Carolina,Winthrop College, Furman University,Benedict College, and Columbia College.Collectively, these higher educationinstitutions form The South CarolinaCollaborative to Renew Teacher Educa-tion, which is working with 30 schoolsacross South Carolina to strengthenlinkages between teacher educationprograms and professional growth at thebuilding level. The Collaborative'sactivities are supported through institu-tional contributions and external grants.


Russ BedenbaughDirectorOffice of Professional DevelopmentSouth Carolina Department of Education1429 Senate StreetColumbia, SC 29201803-734-8558

John RobinsonDirectorOffice of Organizational DevelopmentSouth Carolina Department of Education1429 Senate StreetColumbia, SC 29201803-734-8318

Sheila GallagherPresidentSouth Carolina Education Association421 Zimalcrest DriveColumbia, SC 29210803-772-6553


What is the Penny Buying for SouthCarolina?: Assessment of the Sixth Yearof the South Carolina EducationImprovement Act of 1984. SouthCarolina State Board of Education,Division of Public Accountability (1990).

"A Statewide Initiative in South Caro-lina." Ann Ishler. The Journal of StaffDevelopment, Volume 16, No. 2. Na-tional Staff Development Council. (Spring1995).


for 1993.

X66





0 - III a S

South Dakota


South Dakota serves 135,494students in its 177 public schooldistricts. Traditionally a local

control state, the South Dakota legisla-ture has granted districts even greatercontrol over education policy. In 1995,the state legislature discarded over 100state laws and 500 administrative rulesgoverning public education. This actionseriously affected the South DakotaDepartment of Education and CulturalAffairs (referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA). The intentwas to transform the SEA from amonitoring/regulatory agency to a sup-port and service-oriented organization.The SEA's authority and budget weredramatically reduced. Rescinding theselaws and regulations eradicated thestate-required publication of schoolassessment results and the rebuilding ofthe school accreditation system. Thefunding fora "modernization" plan for 16school districts implementing schoolreform was eliminated.

The South Dakota Initiative forChallenging Standards established stan-dards in nine curriculum areas. Thestandards were developed by a partner-ship including the SEA, the SouthDakota Initiative for Challenging Stan-dards, the National Science Foundationfunded Statewide Systemic Initiative(SSI), and the Comprehensive SchoolHealth Program. The standards were



adopted by the State Board of Educationin June of 1996. Although the statestandards are voluntary, it is anticipatedthat a new accreditation system willrequire schools to set local standardsthat meet or exceed the state standards.The partnership is currently reviewingteacher certification and recertificationrules to align them with the standards,and is developing professional opportu-nities that will help educators teach tothe standards.


South Dakota has no state plan forprofessional development. However,the Standards Team, an SEA committeeworking on the content standardsinitiative, is planning professional devel-opment opportunities for the 1996-97school year. The Standards Team isdesigning a model to facilitate profes-sional development based on the stan-dards. The state has integrated profes-sional development into its Goals 2000and SSI programs. Establishing continu-ing education units that would beapplied toward recertification require-ments is also under consideration

Teacher Certification Policies.Many requirements for the renewal ofteaching certificates were eliminated in1995 when the rules governing certifica-tion and recertification were reducedfrom 59 rules with 195 subdivisions to 19

rules with 31 subdivisions. The state iscurrently reviewing teacher certificationand recertification policies. At present,teachers must renew their certificatesevery five years by earning six semesterhours of credit. Three credits may beSEA-issued; the other three must becollege credits. Provisional or masterteacher certificates are not available.Teachers who earn advanced degreesmay use those credits to renew theircertificates twice during the ten-yearperiod immediately following the award-ing of the degree. Individuals earningadvanced degrees beyond the master'smay renew certificates upon completing90 clock hours of professional develop-ment activities. A human relationsrequirement must be fulfilled by indi-viduals in either situation. Teachers whoobtain National Board Certification maywaive one cycle of renewal requirements.

Credits must be earned from four-year, accredited institutions of highereducation, but may be in the form ofworkshops, telecourses, independentstudies, or correspondence courses.Community college credits are onlyaccepted if transferred to a four-yearinstitution. Credits from South Dakota'spostsecondary technical institutes maybe used if they articulate to a four-yearinstitution, or if prior approval is givenby the Office of Policy and Accountabil-ity.


167

Credits for recertification do nothave to be linked to teaching assign-ments, although they usually must belinked to obtain salary increments.Credits must relate to areas in which theteacher is endorsed, be part of a localstaff development plan, or lead toadditional endorsements or degrees ineducation.

South Dakota has a process forapproving in-service activities for recer-tification purposes. The criteria forapproval include: explanation of thenecessity of the program; identificationof the competencies, knowledge, skills,and techniques on which teachers willfocus; an agenda that indicates how thestated purpose will be accomplished;vitae of qualified instructors; and anevaluation process to measure theprogram's objectives. One-day work-shops do not qualify unless part of aplanned sequence of related profes-sional development activities. Annualmeetings of professional organizationsqualify only on a "prearranged basis,"and in-service instructors cannot receiverenewal credit for conducting work-shops. All applications must besponsored by an in-state agency ororganization, such as the South DakotaEducation Association, AssociatedSchool Boards of South Dakota, SchoolAdministrators of South Dakota, localeducation agencies, education coopera-tives, a group of collaborating districts,or the Division of Education. Thedirector of teacher certification approvesin-service education programs for certifi-cate renewal credit based on review ofthe application.

The South Dakota Advisory Coun-cil on the Certification of Teachers wasestablished by law in 1991. Thisadvisory council is responsible forrecommending criteria and proceduresfor evaluating teacher education pro-grams, and teacher licensure require-ments and renewal standards. TheCouncil serves in an advisory capacityto the South Dakota Board of Educationand the SEA.

State-Supported Programs. Underthe restructured SEA, there is currentlyno office or staff person responsible forprofessional development policy in thestate. The SEA offers occasional

workshops in specific program areaswhen resources and staff are available.Professional development is associatedwith the state's Goals 2000 grant.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The state is involved withthe Interstate New Teacher Assessmentand Support Consortium and Goals 2000.It was involved in the National ScienceFoundation SSI project, under which theSouth Dakota SSI gave grants to schooldistricts to improve teacher capacity.


State Funds. The state previouslyset aside funds for schools to reservethree days each year for professionaldevelopment. This funding endedJanuary 1, 1997. School funding fromstate education aid and local propertytaxes is set at $3,350 per pupil for 1996-97; that figure will increase annually bythe rate of inflation or 3 percent,whichever is lower.

Federal Funds. The state currentlyreceives Goals 2000 funds and previ-ously received NSF funding for profes-sional development. The state receivesEisenhower money and Title I funds thatare used to support professional devel-opment in districts. In FY 1995, the statereceived $1,243,473 in Eisenhower fund-ing.

Local Funds. Local tax dollars arebelieved to be the largest source offunding for professional development.There is no state mandate for localprofessional development spending.Teachers generally pay their own ex-penses to earn college credits.


At one time, the state requireddistricts to establish staff developmentplans and provide funding to coverteacher salaries for three days of staffdevelopment. These requirements wereeliminated in 1995; the funding expired in1996.

2 ICS

Large districts often provide staffdevelopment activities by bringing inoutside consultants. Education coop-eratives satisfy some professional devel-opment needs of districts. Manyschools have established staff develop-ment committees comprised of teachers,but this practice varies from district todistrict.


Professional development is some-times negotiated locally. Teachersgenerally pay for the expenses they incurfor professional development activities,but some schools reimburse them.Districts advance teachers on theirsalary schedules based on professionaldevelopment activities; again, the pro-cess varies by district.

Teacher evaluation is no longerrequired in South Dakota, due to the 1995law that rescinded many of the state'seducation laws and regulations.


The South Dakota Education Asso-ciation (SDEA) offers professional de-velopment workshops and conferencesfor its members. The SDEA often makesarrangements with the SEA to providerecertification credit for teacher partici-pation in these activities.

Subject-matter organizations offerprofessional development for their mem-bers, although these activities do notalways apply toward recertification credit.

Institutions of higher education area substantial provider of professionaldevelopment for South Dakota teachers.The University of South Dakota oper-ates a professional development schoolthat has been in existence for three years.Most colleges in the state developrelationships with local districts andoffer workshops to meet their profes-sional development needs. Institutionsof higher education were collaborative

partners in the state's SSI grant, andhave been involved in the proposedrevisions of the certification and recerti-fication rules and teacher educationprogram standards.

The Curriculum Center is a privatenon-profit organization that is part of aneducational cooperative. The Center isfunded by grants from the SEA and thefederal government to develop schoolimprovement resources. It providesprofessional development in curriculumdevelopment, portfolio assessment, inte-grated curriculum, and leadership train-ing. The Curriculum Center workedclosely with the SEA to write the state'scontent standards.

The Technology and Innovations inEducation (TIE) office receives state andfederal funding to provide professionaldevelopment regarding technology. TheTIE annual conference is attended byapproximately 3,000 educators.

Corporations, such as US West,offer workshops and other professionaldevelopment opportunities for SouthDakota's teachers.


Lynda SederstromDirector of Teacher Education andCertificationSouth Dakota Department of Educationand Cultural Affairs700 Governor's DrivePierre, SD 57501-2291605-773-3134

Charlain GatjeSouth Dakota Teachers Association411 East CapitolPierre, SD 57501605-224-9263

Peggy BlairDirectorSouth DakotaCurriculum Center435 South ChapellePierre, SD 57501605-773-3134






1693

S IS 0 S

TennesseeEducation Policy Context

Tennessee's Education Im-provement Act (EIA) of 1992provides the guiding force for

education policy in the state. Thislegislation created the 21st CenturySchools Program, which establishedschool district and school performancegoals, value-added assessment, and alocal reward/sanction accountability sys-tem. Other key components of theprogram include class size reduction,reforms in secondary curriculum, andmandatory kindergarten. All of theseobjectives will be fully implemented bythe year 2000. The EIA also enacted theBasic Education Program (BEP), a newschool funding formula which wasinstituted to provide equitable andadequate state funds for public educa-tion. A temporary sales tax increase wasauthorized to generate additional rev-enue.

The EIA created a new direction forthe Tennessee State Board of Education(SBE), one that shifted its historic role ofprescribing instructional practice to-wards a more focused role of establish-ing vision and support systems fordistricts to achieve high academicoutcomes. The SBE outlined perfor-mance goals in five areas: student learn-ing, proficiency skills, graduation, pro-motion, and attendance. In 1995, the SBEissued its annual Master Plan forTennessee Schools, identifying nine



priority areas (incorporating Goals 2000components) deemed necessary toachieve its student performance goals.The nine areas are: (1) early childhoodeducation; (2) primary and middle gradeseducation; (3) high school education; (4)technology; (5) professional develop-ment and teacher education; (6) account-ability and assessment; (7) schoolleadership and school-based decisionmaking; (8) school safety; and (9) equityfunding.

The use of technology is a majorfocus of the EIA. Through the 21stCentury Classroom Project, EIA funds acomputerized network involving all Ten-nessee public schools and the StateDepartment of Education (referred tohereafter as the state education agency,or SEA). It also funds teacher trainingfor the integration of technology intoclassroom instruction and technologycoordinators in each district. The projectequips classrooms with multimedia teach-ers, presentation stations, and fournetworked student computers. All 21stCentury Classroom teachers receive 30hours of training in the use of technol-ogy for classroom instruction. Since theproject began in 1993, 4,000 classroomteachers have participated. Three state-operated technology training centerswere created, and teacher educationprograms are now required to incorpo-rate technology training into theircurricula in order to obtain accreditation.In 1995, the legislature committed addi-

tional resources to equip every schoollibrary with a computer linked to astatewide network via the Internet.Librarians received training to use theequipment. The goal is for all Tennesseeschools to "join hands electronically" bythe 1996-97 school year.


The Comprehensive Education Re-form Act (CERA) of 1984 mandated thatthe SBE develop a state policy regardingprofessional development. In turn, theSEA was directed to collaborate with thestate's three Administrative Study Coun-cils (for superintendents, instructionalsupervisors, and school principals) andthe Tennessee Teachers Study Councilto design and implement professionaldevelopment opportunities. The out-growth of this activity was the develop-ment of the Tennessee Academy forSchool Leaders (TASL) and the Tennes-see Executive Development programtwo initiatives that have providedtraining for school administrators, in-structional supervisors, and superinten-dents. Teacher professional develop-ment, at that time, focused on preparingteachers for career ladders.

The 1995 Master Plan for TennesseeSchools expanded state policies in thisarea. The plan identifies the SEA' s rolein providing opportunities for profes-sional development through state-spon-


1 70 BEST COPY AVAILABLE

sored institutes, academies, and work-shops. In addition, the SEA is re-sponsible for establishing "a statewide[electronic] clearinghouse of informa-tion" on innovative practices andtraining resources.

Primary responsibility for profes-sional development is placed at the locallevel. Districts and schools are encour-aged to create flexible scheduling toincrease professional development timewithin the school structure, to strengthenlinkages between professional develop-ment activities and school improvementgoals, and to use technology to supportprofessional development activities. Al-though the plan does not mandatespecific activities, it does outline targetareas in which professional developmentis needed in order to obtain EIA goals.The professional development targetareas are:

teaching strategies to ensure that allchildren are successful;

use of assessment to improveteaching and learning;

use of technology to enhancelearning;

school-based decision making;

non-graded, multi-aged classroomsfor primary students;

curricular, instructional, and sched-uling strategies to implement middleschool concepts;

curriculum integration;

early childhood education, parentingskills, and family resource centers;

mentoring support for beginningteachers and administrators; and

parental involvement.

Teacher Certification Policies. Li-censure policies are administered by theSEA' s Office of Teacher Licensing. Priorto 1984, Tennessee offered only onetype of teaching certificate, the Profes-sional License, which was renewable

every ten years. CERA restructured theteacher licensing system into a three-tiered model.

Upon completion of preservicerequirements, new teachers are nowissued a five-year, renewable Probation-ary License, which may be upgradedafter one year of teaching service andsatisfactory completion of a local evalua-tion. Currently, Tennessee does notmandate a program for beginning teach-ers; however, in 1988, the SBE soughtfunding to support a state-sponsoredinternship/induction program for newteachers. This policy would have giventeachers the option of either enrolling ina fifth-year internship program as part oftheir teacher education programs orparticipating in a first-year inductionprogram. Although funding for thisactivity was not passed by the legisla-ture, SBE officials report that manydistricts are implementing new teachersupport programs on their own. Simi-larly, several teacher education pro-grams in the state are offering a fifth-yearinternship to their students.

Once teachers reach the second tier,they are issued a five-year, renewableApprentice License that is upgradedafter four years of in-state teachingservice. Third-tier teachers receive aProfessional License that is renewableevery ten years. Recertification require-ments vary, depending on the highestdegree earned. Teachers at the bachelor'slevel must complete six semester hoursof undergraduate or graduate credit inorder to renew their licenses. Teacherswith master's degrees are not required toearn additional course credit but must bein active teaching service for at least fiveyears within each ten-year cycle.

The State Certification Commission(formerly known as the Advisory Coun-cil on Teacher Education and Certifica-tion) is a statutory body that wasreactivated in 1986 for the purpose ofexamining existing regulations and pro-viding policy recommendations to theSBE. The Commission's membership isappointed by the SBE; two-thirds are K-12 educators, and other members includecollege or university faculty, SBE mem-bers, and SEA staff. The full Commis-sion meets three times each year. Ad hoccommittees meet on a more frequent

basis to conduct research and providerecommendations on teacher policies.Currently, the SEA' s Office of CareerLadder Certification is piloting a newmodel for teacher evaluations. Themodel would incorporate Tennessee'steaching competercies, reflect InterstateNew Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium (INTASC) standards, andemphasize professional growth for expe-rienced teachers.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA recently restructured its manage-ment operations for state-sponsoredprofessional development. Under thenewly formed Division of Training andProfessional Development, the SEAcommits a staff of 30 (including programdirectors, resource specialists, and ad-ministrative coordinators) to promoteand strengthen leadership within localschool systems. The SEA also maintainsa Division of Teaching and Learning thatprovides professional development fo-cused on subject-matter and contentstandards. State-sponsored profes-sional development programs servesuperintendents, school administrators,board members, and teachers. The SEAhas contracted with the Center forResearch in Educational Policy at theUniversity of Memphis to evaluate state-sponsored professional developmentactivities in terms of their impact andalignment with educators' needs. Areport on evaluation findings wasreleased in June of 1996.

The SEA introduced its TeacherLeadership Development program in1992. The program consists of week-long, summer in-service academies forTeachers of Writing and Foreign Lan-guage; a Cooperative Learning Institute;Tennessee's Teacher of the Year Award;the Teacher Study Council; ProjectPASS, which is a minority teacherrecruitment program; and Positive Atti-tudes for Tennessee Schools (PATS),which provides training in effectiveschools concepts such as student self-esteem, learning styles, and schoolclimate and focuses on local schoolimprovement planning. The Academyfor Teachers as Leaders, the Academyfor Teachers in a Diverse Society, andthe Alternative Assessment Workshopwere added in the summer of 1996. Other

activities include advanced Internetworkshops. The SEA collaborates withuniversities and other professional de-velopment providers to implement thisprogram.

Each academy serves between 50and 150 teachers annually, while over1,000 teachers participate each year inthe institutes. Since 1989, 204 schoolshave participated in PATS training,which is provided according to a three-year cohort cycle. It should be notedthat, while administrators and boardmembers are required to attend certainstate-sponsored professional develop-ment activities, participation in teachertraining activities is optional and pro-vided on a "first come, first served"basis.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Tennessee is using its Goals2000 funds to support school reforminitiatives in the areas of staff develop-ment and preservice training. Competi-tive grants are available to schoolsystems, individual schools, and con-sortia. A total of 116 projects have beenawarded Goals 2000 subgrants, rangingfrom $26,000 to $241,000. Many of theseprojects have included teacher profes-sional development opportunities.

The Memphis public school districthas received an Urban Systemic Initia-tive (USI) grant from the NationalScience Foundation (NSF). This grantprovides substantial support for teacherprofessional development.


State Funds. The state does notprovide categorical funds to supportlocal professional development. SEA-sponsored professional developmentactivities are supported largely throughstate appropriations. In 1994-95, thestate spent $3.1 million on SEA-sponsored professional developmentprograms. This total includes profes-sional development for superintendents,school administrators, and teachers. Ofthis amount, funds for teacher profes-sional development programs included$1.7 million for 21st Century ClassroomTraining, which provided funds for

computer equipment, training, and tech-nical support; $300,000 for PATS;$130,000 for Teachers of Writing andForeign Language; $60,000 for theAcademy for Teacher Leaders; $40,000for the Teacher Study Council; $35,000for Alternative Assessment Workshops;$30,000 for the Academy for Teachers ina Diverse Society; $22,000 for theCooperative Learning Institute; and$10,000 for the Tennessee Teacher of theYear Award.

Federal Funds. In 1995-96, Tennes-see received a $3.7-million EisenhowerProfessional Development grant and a$1.5-million Goals 2000 grant.

Local Funds. Districts are encour-aged to use state and local funds forprofessional development in the areas offocus outlined in the SBE's professionaldevelopment policy. The majority offunds for local professional develop-ment activities is provided throughfederal Eisenhower funds. Districts mayuse Career Ladder extended contractdollars for professional development(see below).


The EIA requires that districtssubmit to the SEA an annual schoolimprovement plan that includes profes-sional development activities. The lawfurther requires that in-service days beused in accordance with the professionaldevelopment objectives outlined in theplans. The existing school calendarincludes ten non-instructional days, fiveof which are specified for local in-serviceactivities. In December of 1995, the SBEadopted a new rule intended to providemore time for professional development.Schools may extend the regular day by30 minutes, accumulating 2.5 hours eachweek, which can then be used for earlydismissal. This rule is intended toencourage school-based professionaldevelopment and collegial planning timeduring the regular school schedule.

172


Tennessee statute allows collectivebargaining at the local level. The statesalary schedule awards a $600 incrementfor the completion of graduate study insubject-matter or pedagogy-related con-tent at the master's, master's plus 30credits, and doctorate levels. Officialsreport that districts normally supplementthis increment. Teachers are not re-imbursed for tuition costs.

In 1984, Tennessee became one ofthe first states in the nation to implementa Career Ladder program. Teachers mustobtain the Professional License in orderto participate. To become eligible, theymust also successfully complete a state-conducted evaluation process and havethe appropriate years of teaching experi-encefour years for Level I, eight yearsfor Level II, and 12 years for Level III.Teachers who meet the criteria receive aten-year, renewable Career Ladder Cer-tificate, which entitles them to annualsalary supplements of $1,000 for Level I,$2,000 for Level II, and $3,000 for LevelM. Career Ladder teachers may alsoreceive extended contracts of up to eightweeks, which are awarded based on theirschools' needs. Teachers earn $2,000 foreach month of an extended contract.


The Tennessee Education Associa-tion (TEA), through its Instruction andProfessional Development (IPD) divi-sion, offers training activities through-out the year to assist teachers inbecoming effective advocates and prac-titioners of professional growth. TheIPD division is staffed by three full-timecoordinators and a field team of over 30presenters who provide training work-shops at districts' and schools' re-quests. Every year, TEA sponsors threeone-day IPD conferences on a pedagogi-cal topic (e.g., authentic assessment oreducational technology). IPD confer-ences attract 100 participants per site.

3

TEA also sponsors several three-dayconferences, on topics such as MinorityIssues, Technology, and Women'sConcerns, that include training work-shops. TEA training services are sup-ported through membership dues.

Three institutions of higher educa-tion (IHE)the University of Memphis,Vanderbilt-Peabody College, and theUniversity of Tennesseehave helpedto establish professional developmentschools (PDS). Sixteen PDS sites cur-rently operate in the state, 11 of whichwere initiated by the University ofMemphis' Professional DevelopmentSchool Program, which began in 1990.Vanderbilt-Peabody College operatesthree PDS sites, and the University ofTennessee maintains two sites. Cur-rently, 400 teachers participate in thisprogram and receive 51 hours of stafftraining. An IHE faculty member isassigned to the school on a part-timebasis to serve as the key liaison betweenthe school and IHE staff. IHE facultysecure resources and provide technicalassistance as needed.

Partners in Public Education is apublic education fund that was createdin 1994 to promote education restructur-ing in Memphis City Schools. The fundprovided resources to create a Teachingand Learning Academy, which opened inApril of 1996. The goal of the Academyis to reshape the mode of teacher trainingactivities offered by the district from thatof stand-alone, in-service workshops toongoing, professional development ex-periences that are interconnected andaligned with an instructional missionstatement. The Academy serves all ofthe district's approximately 6,000 teach-ers. Memphis is also one of ten NewAmerican Schools Development Corpo-ration (NASDC) jurisdictions in thenation and receives professional devel-opment resources and opportunitiesthrough this initiative.


Susan HudsonDivision of Training and ProfessionalDevelopmentTennessee Department of EducationFifth Floor, Gateway Plaza710 James Robertson ParkwayNashville, TN 37243-0376615-532-4713

Alphonso ManceAssistant Executive DirectorTennessee Education Association801 Second Avenue NorthNashville, TN 37201-1099615-242-8392

E. Dean ButlerDirectorCenter for Research in EducationalPolicyThe University of MemphisEducation Annex 1Memphis, TN 38152901-678-2310


Master Plan for Tennessee Schools:Preparing for the 21st Century. Ten-nessee State Board of Education (1995).

Challenges and Issues in TennesseeEducation: A 1995 Profile. E. DeanButler. Center for Research in Educa-tional Policy, The University of Mem-phis (August 1995).

"Professional Development Policy forTennessee's Schools." Tennessee StateBoard of Education (July 31,1992).

Tennessee's Teacher Education Policy:A Mid-Course Assessment. AdvisoryCouncil on Teacher Education andCertification, Tennessee State Board ofEducation (November 19,1993).


for 1993.






TexasEducation Policy Context

Texas, the second largest state inthe nation, has 1,046 districts and6,465 campuses in its public

education system. It continues to bechallenged with meeting the demands ofan ever-growing and diverse studentpopulation and has undergone massivechanges regarding education policy inrecent years. In the 1995 legislativesession, the entire education code wasrewritten through Senate Bill 1 to reducerules and regulations, to address thegranting of waivers from rules andregulations that place barriers on stu-dent achievement, to provide greaterflexibility for campuses and communi-ties, and to create opportunities forincreased local decision making. Inaddition, the new governor, George W.Bush, has emphasized pursuing foureducational themes: enhanced localcontrol, a high degree of accountability,a focus on core curriculum areas, andschool safety.


Education leaders recognize thecritical link between professional devel-opment and improved student achieve-ment. Texans believe that standardspromote systemic change, and the statehas already enacted standards thatfocus on creating a lifelong learning



community. In 1994, the Texas Educa-tion Agency (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) pre-sented "a comprehensive and coherentprofessional development system thatlinks all aspects of the educationprofession."

The process for developing thissystem took more than three years tocomplete and involved the collaborationof hundreds of professionals to definewhat teachers, administrators, and othereducators should know and be able todo. Texas is a member of the InterstateNew Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium (INTASC) and has usedINTASC standards in formulating itsteacher proficiencies and teacher ap-praisal system. INTASC recommenda-tions were also used in developingstandards for continuing teacher profes-sional development.

Texas' teacher proficiencies focuson learner-centered knowledge, instruc-tion, communication, and professionaldevelopment, as well as equity andexcellence for all learners. The masteryof identified proficiencies at differentlevels provides a career-long profes-sional development plan for teachersand administrators.

Teacher Certification Policies.Applicants for a teaching certificate arerequired to have a degree in an academicmajor. (Undergraduate education de-grees have not been granted since 1991. )The final step for initial certification is to

pass at least two tests of the Examinationfor the Certification of Educators inTexas (ExCET), one in education peda-gogy and one in a subject or specialty.Teachers who successfully complete anapproved teacher education program areeligible for a Lifetime Provisional Certifi-cate. Teachers who possess a graduatedegree and/or a special service certifi-cate are eligible for Lifetime ProfessionalCertificates. The state also has estab-lished provisions for emergency andalternative certifications.

Since 1993, it has been required thatall beginning teachers be assigned amentor and attend a teacher orientation.The specific activities attached to theserequirements are not funded by the stateand are determined by local schooldistricts. Many districts have developedtheir own mentor training programs,based on the Mentoring Framework forTexas Teachers, a document developedby the SEA.

The State Board for EducatorCertification (SBEC) was created in 1995.Authorized through Senate Bill 1, theSBEC was established "to recognizepublic school educators as profession-als and to grant educators the authorityto govern the standards of theirprofession." Its voting membership iscomprised of four teachers, two adminis-trators, one counselor, and five citizens;non-voting members include one deanfrom a college of education and twomembers representing the state's corn-

'This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polig Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely


(4

missioners of education and highereducation. The 12 voting members andthe dean are appointed by the governor.

By statute, the SBEC is required toestablish license renewal requirementsthat will, in effect, eliminate lifetimecertification. In addition, some profes-sional development requirements will fallunder this board's jurisdiction. As theSBEC undertakes this restructuringprocess, the state's teacher proficiencieswill serve as a foundation for discussion.The SBEC must have continuing educa-tion and certificate renewal requirementsin place no later than November 1, 1997.

State-Supported Programs. Thestate supports several major profes-sional development initiatives. Primaryamong these are Texas' 20 EducationService Centers (ESCs) and the 26Centers for Professional Developmentand Technology (CPDTs). ESC staffrespond to district and school requestsfor technical assistance and training andalso provide administrative support.The ESCs serve a critical role incoordinating and supporting "educatormentor networks" that have been devel-oped at the elementary, middle, and highschool levels. They also serve as forumsfor information sharing and curriculumdevelopment. Some mentor schoolshave been selected as Reading SpotlightSchools to support the governor's andthe state's reading initiative. Thepurpose of identifying these publicschools is to showcase a variety ofprograms operating in Texas that areknown to be successful in developingreading skills, particularly in grades K-3.

The CPDTs were created by thelegislature in 1991 as collaborativeinitiatives between and among universi-ties, ESCs, school districts, and localbusinesses. The Centers provideintensive, field-based teacher prepara-tion programs, serve as demonstrationsites for integrating technology andinnovative teaching practices into class-rooms, and offer ongoing professionaldevelopment for practicing teachers.Eight centers were started in 1993, withsix added in 1994 and three in 1995. Thelegislature's intention was to fund start-up, but to have ESCs rely on customerpayment for services to support their

continuation. As mandated by the Ed-ucation Code enacted in 1995, CPDTs areregulated by the SBEC.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Texas Science andMathematics Renaissance (TSMR) isfunded by a five-year, $10-million State-wide Systemic Initiative (SSI) grant fromthe National Science Foundation (NSF).A portion of the SSI funds is used toimplement professional development inmath and science. Three of the state'slargests districtsDallas, El Paso andSan Antoniohave received NSF UrbanSystemic Initiatives (USI) grants.

Texas' Goals 2000 plan, Academics2000, supports the newly revised stateeducation code and awards grants toschools for improving core contentareas, particularly reading in the earlygrades. A portion of Academics 2000funds has been used to establish Cen-ters for Educator Development, whichprovide training in reading and socialstudies. The Centers will model effectivestaff development practices that exem-plify good instruction, including the newTexas Essential Knowledge and, Skills(TEKS). The Reading Center, located atthe University of Texas at Austin, is acollaboration with ESC Region XIII andthe Austin Independent School District.The Social Studies Center is located atthe ESC for Region VI and represents acollaboration with Texas A&M Univer-sity. Academics 2000 funds will also beused to add a technology component tothe Centers.

The Rockefeller Foundation hasprovided funding for an innovativeprofessional development project in SanAntonio, one of the state's largestdistricts. Each school has a full-timeschool-based trainer, called an instruc-tional guide, who serves as a coach andcollaborator for the implementation ofnew instructional strategies. Futuretraining for the instructional guides willinclude strengthening their knowledgeof academic content. Guides not onlywork with teachers and staff in theirschools, but also work across theirdistrictsin effect, creating a learningnetwork that fosters the ability ofschools to learn from each other. Planscall for expanding this network to includeparents and community members.


State Funds. Texas does notallocate state funds directly to districtsfor professional development. TheCPDTs are funded under a specialappropriation; they received $13.2 mil-lion for 1993, $12.2 million for 1994, and$9.3 million for 1995. The ESCs receivean annual statewide appropriation of $5million per year; $2.5 million goes directlyto the ESCs, and the remaining funds aredispersed either to school districts or tothe ESCs, depending on the providerthat individual districts choose to deliveradditional staff development services.ESCs and CPDTs are required to submitannual performance reports to the SEA,which are considered in the determina-tion of future funding.

Federal Funds. Texas received$7,293,999 in Goals 2000 funding in1994, $29,228,278 in 1995, and $27,187,479in 1996. In 1995-96, Texas received$16,633,568 in Eisenhower funds tosupport teacher professional develop-ment.

Local Funds. Districts use acombination of local, state, and federalfunds to support local professionaldevelopment. Districts pay fees toobtain services from ESCs and CPDTs.

The Impact of StatePolicies on LocalProfessional Development

Senate Bill 1 directs that profes-sional development be primarily campus-based and related to achieving campusperformance objectives. It also stipu-lates that school-based decision-makingcommittees develop and approve staffdevelopment for the campus and thatdistrict-level decision-making commit-tees develop and approve staff develop-ment for the district. The Bill states:

Campus staff development mayinclude activities that enable thecampus staff to plan together toenhance existing skills, to shareeffective strategies; to reflect oncurricular and instructional issues,to analyze student achievement

results, to reflect on means ofincreasing student achievement, tostudy research, to practice newmethods, to identify students'strengths and needs, to developmeaningful programs for students,to appropriately implement site-based decision-making, and toconduct action research. Thecampus staff development activitiesmay be conducted using studyteams, individual research, peercoaching, workshops, seminars,conferences, or other reasonablemethods that have the potential toimprove student achievement.

In 1995, the commissioner of educa-tion recommended a 20-day staff devel-opment requirement to enable schoolstaffs to meet the high state standards.No legislation was passed, and the cost,when calculated, was astronomical.Currently, there are provisions thatwould allow schools up to five profes-sional development days during the1996-97 school year.


The state minimum teacher salaryschedule has 21 steps (0-20) which arebased solely on years of experience andare adjusted as a function of statespending per student. The majority ofdistricts supplement the state's minimumschedule based on degrees earned,credits earned, merit, and other factors.State law prohibits collective bargaining.

The state does not fund a reimburse-ment program for tuition or otherprofessional development activities.Such compensation may be provided atthe discretion of a district.


The SEA collaborates with numer-ous professional educator associationsand subject-matter groups throughoutthe state to sponsor conferences andworkshops.

The Texas Staff Development Coun-cil (TSDC) provides leadership andsupport for effective staff developmentprograms and practices in the state.Since 1992, TSDC has engaged innetworking activities, provided directservices, and participated in stateplanning committees to influence policymakers and other organizations regard-ing the importance of professionaldevelopment in achieving school im-provement. In addition to its annualstatewide conference, TSDC publishes abiannual newsletter and conducts sev-eral "special topic" seminars throughoutthe year.


Mark LittletonExecutive DirectorState Board for Educator Certification1001 TrinityAustin, TX 78701512-469-3000

Robin GilchristAssistant Commissioner for ReadingInitiativesTexas Education Agency1701 North Congress AvenueAustin, TX 78701512-463-9027

Karen HowardPresidentTexas Staff Development Council405 East Davis StreetMesquite, TX 75149214-288-6411


1.76





3

5 S

UtahEducation Policy Context

Utah's public education systemhas the fourth smallest numberof districts (40) of any state in

the nation. Utah is striving to meet thediverse needs of a rapidly growingstudent population, expected to reach500,000 students by the year 2000, in its716 schools. In 1991, Utah's governorand legislature commissioned a legisla-tive task force to develop a mission forpublic education, set policy guidelines,and identify strategies for improvingeducational structures and student per-formance. The resulting Utah StatePublic Education Strategic Plan wasissued in January of 1992 and formallyadopted by the State Board of Education(SBE) shortly thereafter. The planoutlined nine strategic areas to guidedecision making regarding educationpolicy: (1) create an accountable,outcome-based education system; (2)provide school choice to stimulatecompetitiveness and improvement; (3)allow greater school autonomy forinstructional programming; (4) enhanceteacher compensation and professional-ism; (5) empower students to assumemore responsibility in their learning; (6)utilize technology to enhance instruc-tion; (7) provide and align staff trainingwith school improvement goals; (8)involve businesses in education; and (9)inform community stakeholders.



While the Strategic Plan was effect-ive in articulating a vision of schoolimprovement, the financial resourcesneeded to implement it were initiallyabsent. Nonetheless, Utah schoolsdeveloped strategic plans, integratedinstructional technology, and createdsite-based decision-making councils.Funding to implement schools' strategicplans arrived in 1993, when newlyelected Governor Mike Leavitt workedwith the legislature and educators toenact HB 100, commonly referred to asthe "Centennial Schools Program."Schools that apply and are accepted toparticipate in this program receive a one-year, non-restrictive $5,000 base grantplus $20 per student, based on yearlyaverage attendance. The Governor'sOffice and the SBE select up to 100schools each year to participate in theprogram, based on the implementation ofa strategic plan, clear student perfor-mance goals, and student assessmentstrategies and on the integration oftechnology, parental involvement, andlinkages with community and businessorganizations.


In November of 1994, the Utah StateOffice of Education (referred to hereafteras the state education agency, or SEA)created a 35-member Staff Development

Task Force, which developed policyrecommendations for the SEA and SBEregarding professional development.This effort has been conducted incollaboration with the Inservice Cur-riculum Council (ICC) and the Utah StaffDevelopment Council (USDC). Since1986, the ICC has assisted the SEA inidentifying and designing programs thatmeet the staff development needs oflocal districts. The USDC was created in1993 to provide a more formal structurefor establishing statewide goals forprofessional development.

The Staff Development Task Forcereviewed the national research literature,as well as existing Utah policies andfunding patterns for staff development.The Task Force issued a report in July of1995 that highlighted the followingrecommendations: develop a statepolicy for staff development; establish afull-time Staff Development Coordinatorposition within the SEA; appropriate 2percent of the Minimal School Programfor staff development activities at thelocal level and $1 million for statewidepreparation activities; establish an inter-sectional committee at the SEA and anadvisory committee on staff develop-ment for the SBE; and encourage localdistricts to create a staff developmentpolicy, designate a staff developmentcoordinator, align staff developmentactivities with improvement goals, andevaluate their programs. Bills to support




these recommendations were introducedin the Utah legislature during the 1996session; however, funding was notapproved.

Teacher Certification Policies. Utahhas two state-level advisory committeesthat focus on teacher certification. TheState Advisory Committee on Certifica-tion, for the past 30 years, has re-commended policies for teacher certifica-tion. The Committee consists of sixclassroom teachers, four principals, fourdistrict superintendents, the deans ofteacher preparation programs, and onerepresentative each from the teachers'association, the State Board of Regents,the PTA, the SEA, and the SBE. RecentCommittee recommendations, which tookeffect in 1996, resulted in the modifica-tion of teacher preservice requirementsto reflect Interstate New Teacher As-sessment and Support Consortium(INTASC) and the National Council forAccreditation of Teacher Education(NCATE ) standards.

The Utah Professional PracticesAdvisory Committee oversees policiesand procedures for revoking teachingcertification. Established by the legisla-ture in 1973, the Committee is chargedwith investigating any filed complaintthat questions the professional conduct(pertaining to standards of competenceor ethics) of a teacher or administrator.The 11-member committee is appointedfor a three-year term by the statesuperintendent. The investigation pro-cess consists of a peer review and aformal hearing before a recommendationis issued to the SBE either to warn,reprimand, suspend, or revoke aneducator's certification.

Currently, recertification require-ments for Utah teachers are based solelyon years of teaching experience. Uponcompletion of an accredited preserviceprogram, teachers are issued a basiccertificate that is renewable every fiveyears, as long as the candidate has beenan active classroom teacher for threeyears within that cycle. Utah's statutefor teacher evaluation requires that newteachers participate in a mentoringprogram that is locally designed. Teacherassociation and SEA officials report,however, that the quality of teachermentoring programs varies considerably

by district. In addition, the state doesnot monitor this activity.

State-Supported Programs. Coor-dinated through its Office of TeacherCertification and Personnel Develop-ment, the SEA conducts a annual seriesof "Summer Institutes" that are offeredfree of charge (unless credits areawarded) at locations throughout thestate. The SEA utilizes a team of 23 staffspecialists to facilitate the one- to two-week Institutes. An estimated 12,000teachers participate in workshops thatfocus primarily on content area instruc-tion but also include techniques ininstructional technology, site-based man-agement, interdisciplinary curriculumdevelopment, and parental involvement.The SEA publishes an annual listing ofsummer in-service activities conductedby the state and other providers such ashigher education institutions and localdistricts.

Since 1993, the SEA's Office ofCurriculum and Instruction has receivedan Inservice Fund, which is a set-asideappropriation from the legislature. TheInservice Fund supports statewide ac-tivities that assist teachers and adminis-trators in understanding and implement-ing Utah's new core curricula in

mathematics, science, language arts, andsocial studies. During the first twoyears, this effort focused on languagearts and mathematics; in 1995-96 itfocused on the science curriculum.While this activity is not mandatory, all40 districts have participated.

State-funded Regional Service Cen-ters (RSCs) were created in 1980 torespond directly to district superinten-dent requests for technical assistanceand other resource information. Thereare four regionally based RSCs in Utah.Financial support for the RSCs wasinitially substantial and secured prima-rily through federal grants. In the pastseveral years, however, one districtofficial reported that funding cutbackshave reduced RSC allocations and havethus affected the quality and compre-hensiveness of their services. The StaffDevelopment Task Force has recom-mended that the state fund a full-timeprofessional development specialist ateach RSC site.

The SEA's Educational TechnologyInitiative (ETI) Project Office was formedin 1990 with the enactment of FIB 468,which promoted the use of technology inthe state's public schools. The legisla-tion provided funds and technicalassistance to school districts thatprepared and submitted a five-yeartechnology plan to the state. Districtsare currently in the process of writingnew five-year technology plans, whichmust include a comprehensive in-servicecomponent. According to SEA applica-tion guidelines, 25 percent of districts'ETI funds must be allocated for thispurpose.

The SEA also funds events andactivities conducted by the USDC.USDC-coordinated staff developmentactivities focus on collegial practice andorganizational restructuring issues. Uti-lizing a trainer-trainee model of servicedelivery, USDC recruits nationally re-nowned consultants to work withteacher-leaders, who subsequently sharetheir expertise with districts and schoolsthroughout the state.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Created in 1991, the UtahAgenda for Meeting the Needs ofStudents with Disabilities sets out astrategic plan for providing each dis-abled student with a learning environ-ment that will enable him or her "tobecome a caring, competent, and con-tributing citizen in an integrated, diverse,and changing society." The Agenda isbeing implemented in conjunction withthe state's overall strategic educationplan. Its activities are managed by theSEA's Special Education Services Unitand supported primarily through federalfunds provided by the Individuals withDisabilities Education Act (IDEA). Pro-fessional development, one of ninestrategic areas outlined in the plan, isbeing addressed by a strategic planningteam that represents an interagencysystem of planning, training, and imple-mentation. One key outgrowth of theAgenda is the Utah Project on Inclusion,which provides technical assistance toschools that have adopted inclusionmodels and that have set high expecta-tions for all students. The Agenda alsodeveloped the Behavioral and Educa-tional Strategies for Teachers (BEST)

Program, which establishes lighthouseschools at the elementary, middle, andhigh school levels. BEST schools modelexemplary teaching methods in buildingsocial competence skills for students.

Also funded through IDEA, theUtah Special Education Consortium(established in 1980) conducts jointplanning and brainstorming sessions toaddress students' needs. Two projectsthat provide professional developmentservices to teachers and administratorshave emerged from the Consortium. Thefirst program, the Utah Learning Re-source Center, was established in 1976 torespond to district requests for informa-tion and on-site technical assistance.Participant records indicate that 60 to 70percent of all Resource Center users areregular, classroom-licensed educators.For the past ten years, the secondprogram, the Utah Mentor TeacherAcademy, has trained experienced teach-ers and administrators to become in-school consultants. Academy partici-pants enroll in a two-year trainingprogram, and the Academy admits 40new candidates every year. A total of500 educators have completed theprogram. The Academy hosts an annualconference for all program graduates topromote discussion and networkingamong these in-school consultants.

Utah's Goals 2000 funds are beingutilized to support local initiatives thatencourage professional growth for class-room teachers and other school person-nel. The USDC assisted six districts insubmitting proposals; one effort re-sulted in a $35,000 grant for the SaltLake City district to develop a trainer-trainee model for curriculum integration.


State Funds. The state does notprovide categorical funding to supportlocal professional development. Datacompiled by the Staff Development TaskForce calculated totals of $7.4 million instate funds and $5.9 million in federalfunds that were used for professionaldevelopment during 1994-95. Of thosestate funds, approximately 73 percent

was distributed to districts and schoolsin the form of competitive grants.

The Educational Technology Initia-tive received an initial $66-million stateallocation in 1990. The 1995-96 alloca-tion for this program totaled approxi-mately $7 million. The Office of Cur-riculum and Instruction received aninitial 1993 line-item allocation of $350,000for Core Curriculum development activi-ties that, as of 1995-96, has beenincreased to $1.5 million.

In 1995-96, each of the state's fourRSCs received an allocation of $200,000.Utah's Career Ladder program (seebelow) is entirely state-funded andoperates on an average annual budget of$40 million. The SEA has provided$40,000 over the past three years tosupport USDC training activities.

Federal Funds. Utah was awardedGoals 2000 grants of $620,000 for 1995-96 and $2.2 million for 1996-97 to supportlocal professional development initia-tives. Approximately $3.5 million inspecial education (IDEA) funds supportthe Utah Agenda and Special EducationConsortium initiatives. Utah received a$1.8-million Eisenhower ProfessionalDevelopment grant in 1995-96.

Local Funds. Funds for locallysponsored professional developmentare allocated at the district's discretion.Typically, districts use Career Ladderoptions (see below) as a primary sourceof professional development funds,although the extent and nature of thisactivity varies greatly. State guidelinesfor Eli grantees were revised for 1995-96, encouraging participating districts toallocate a minimum of 25 percent of theirgrants for teacher in-service activities.


The state's Centennial SchoolsProgram mandates that participatingschools develop a strategic plan. Profes-sional development is strongly encour-aged as a component of the plan but isnot required. New application guidelinesfor Ell require that teacher in-serviceactivities be a component of districts'technology plans, but do not mandate a

173

minimum budget allocation to supportthese activities. Based on recommenda-tions from the Staff Development TaskForce, the SBE and the SEA (inconjunction with others) will begin todevelop a state policy for professionaldevelopment that may eventually lead toincreased planning and resource sup-port for this activity at the local level.

Both SEA and district officialsreport that funds provided through theCareer Ladder Program are most oftenused to add extended contract days thatallow time for teacher planning and in-service activities. Districts that utilizethis option are allowed to add up to sixadditional contract days. The regularschool-year calendar consists of 180days with no minimum set-aside for non-instructional activities. Officials esti-mate that most districts allocate betweenone and five non-instructional days peryear, supported primarily through CareerLadder funds.


Nearly all districts provide sometype of salary schedule increase basedon experience and/or additional collegedegrees or credits earned. Teachercompensation for participation in profes-sional development activities is deter-mined locally. An SEA official reportedthat federally funded in-service activitieswere more likely to provide expensesreimbursement or stipends than state-funded activities.

Since 1985, Utah has offered aCareer Ladder program that providesfunding incentives to promote teacherprofessional growth. Districts areallocated funds based on weighted pupilunits and the number of certified staff.Based on local bargaining agreements,districts may choose from several CareerLadder options: teacher performancebonuses, awarded based on excellence;extended contract days, which are paid,non-instructional days beyond the regu-lar school year; teacher in-servicetraining stipends; job enlargement, pro-viding extra pay for extra work; andteacher shortage funds to pay foradditional teachers.


The Utah Education Association(UEA) offers numerous training eventsand activities through its Instruction andProfessional Development Program. UEAsponsors three major events that focuson enhancing teacher skills and updat-ing their subject-matter knowledge.Attended by an estimated 7,000 to 10,000teachers per year, the UEA's annual fallconvention is a two-day event thatoffers workshops and seminars onsubject matter and pedagogy. UEA alsohosts winter and summer conferences onvarious professional, educational, andcurriculum topics and conducts monthlyprofessional development workshopsduring the school year. UEA's Profes-sional Development Program has been aleader in providing training in site-baseddecision-making concepts, processes,and skills. In addition, training is offeredby request to individual schools, dis-tricts, and local associations in topicssuch as conflict resolution, time manage-ment, and strategic planning. Themajority of UEA training activities areoffered free of charge. The UEA alsocollaborates with the SEA and othergroups to co-sponsor training eventsand conferences.

Faculty at the University of Utah'sGraduate School of Education (GSE)provide high-quality professional devel-opment activities to principals, schoolcounselors, school psychologists, andspecial education teachers throughoutthe state. Regarding elementary andsecondary teachers, GSE's Departmentof Educational Studies provides a widevariety of professional developmentopportunities. In 1978, the Departmentinitiated school-based Professional De-velopment Centers (PDCs). In 1987, theUniversity, in conjunction with localschool districts, established seven Pro-fessional Development Schools (PDSs)and 15 related collaborative TeacherEducation Sites (TESs). The MastersCooperative Program is a two-yearcourse of graduate study that allowsteachers to systematically study theirpractice and participate in on-sitecoursework. Every two years, a cohort

of 25 teachers is admitted to the program,which entails two graduate courses perquarter. Efforts are currently underwayto establish a similar program forteachers with a master's degree. ActionResearch Teams are created to providean ongoing forum for classroom teachersto study their own practice. TheUniversity of Utah provides teachers atPDS sites with a 50 percent tuitionreduction and library privileges.

The Brigham Young University(BYU)-Public School Partnership, cre-ated in 1983, is a collaborative amongBYU's College of Education and fiveUtah school districts. It currently serves38 schools. The Partnership focuses onfour major areas: preservice, in-service,curriculum development, and research.Preservice teachers are placed in partner-ship schools for a one-year internshipand work with an experienced teachermentor and a B YU faculty member. Eachyear, four elementary school teachers arereleased from their classroom assign-ments to serve as "Faculty Associates"who provide technical assistance toother teachers, university faculty, andpreservice candidates. A TeacherLeadership Master's Degree programallows partner school teachers to as-sume leadership roles while remaining inthe classroom; 18 teachers participatedin this program during its first year.Partnership activities are continuallyexpanding and, with assistance from theDeWitt Wallace Fund, a Center ofPedagogy at BYU was established in1995.


Bruce GriffinAssociate Superintendent for StrategicPlanningUtah State Office of Education250 E. 500 SouthSalt Lake City, UT 84111801-538-7762

0

Roger MouritsenCoordinatorTeacher Certification and ProfessionalDevelopmentUtah State Office of Education250 E. 500 SouthSalt Lake City, UT 84111801-538-7741

Betty CondieDirector of Professional DevelopmentUtah Education Association875 E. 5180 SouthMurray, UT 84107801-266-4461, ext. 117






0S

1110 S

VermontEducation Policy Context

Vermont is a small state with astrong tradition of local controlover public education policy.

Its public school population is approxi-mately 105,000 students enrolled in 340schools that are organized into 281school districts. Many districts arecomprised of a single school, reflecting atradition of small towns and a desire forschool-level autonomy. There are 60supervisory unions across the state.Each union has a central administrationwith a superintendent who administersmultiple districts and reports to multiplelocal school boards.

Vermont is currently implementing avariety of statewide education reforms,most notably, a new curriculum frame-work based on the Vermont Frameworkof Standards and Learning Opportuni-ties. Since the 1991-92 school year,Vermont has been implementing a newperformance-based statewide assess-ment system that centers on studentportfolios in math and writing. Portfolioassessment is conducted in grades 4 and8 for mathematics and in grades 5 and 8for writing. A science assessment and amath portfolio for grades 9-12 was addedduring the 1995-96 school year. Accom-panying the new portfolio program wasthe establishment of teacher portfolionetworks for training teachers to scoreportfolios and implement the portfolioprocess. In addition, Vermont has been



reforming its school accreditation sys-tem, changing the delivery of specialeducation and social services in theschools, and attempting to resolveschool finance issues.

All these reforms have implicationsfor teachers. The Vermont Departmentof Education (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) hasbeen challenged to keep pace with thegrowing demands and needs of districtsand their educators.


Vermont has been addressingteacher standards and professionaldevelopment as part of its reform efforts.The State Board of Education (SBE)created the Vermont Standards Board forProfessional Educators in 1989 to regu-late teacher licensure and relicensure,and to approve teacher educationprograms. The Standards Board reportsto the SBE and is staffed by the SEA. It iscomposed of 23 members, who areprimarily teachers, administrators, highereducation representatives, members oflocal standards boards (LSBs), and theCommissioner of Education who servesas an ex-officio member. The StandardsBoard is connected to LSBs that governlocal policies regarding professionaldevelopment. Each supervisory unionmust establish an LSB, which is respon-sible for recommending teachers to the

state Standards Board for license re-newal. While LSBs must comply with theregulations set by the Standards Board,they may add supplemental criteria orstandards.

A statewide plan for professionaldevelopment, presented to the SBE inMay of 1995, would integrate differentstate-level activities into one coordi-nated plan for teacher professionaldevelopment. Although the plan metwith SBE approval, it is being imple-mented incrementally. The plan focusedon three areas: setting standards forteachers; widely communicating teacherprofessional development opportunitiesthroughout the state; and creating astate policy structure that develops aprepared teaching force.

The SEA convened the VermontConsortium for Professional Develop-ment, which consisted of state policy-makers and professional developmentproviders, in 1991-92, to work with theStandards Board to assess the profes-sional development needs of Vermont'steachers and to examine existing oppor-tunities. The group developed guide-lines and key principles (see below) andacquired a grant to initiate a statewidetracking system for professional devel-opment information. However, statefunding for the Consortium was neverappropriated, and the development ofthe tracking system was put on hold.Instead, the funds for the trackingsystem were applied to the state's

1This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polio, Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polio,- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

181

Statewide Systemic Initiative, the Ver-mont Institute for Science, Math andTechnology (VISMT), for an onlineinformation source about professionaldevelopment.

Thee state Agency of HumanServices (AHS) and the SEA division ofspecial education have initiated a col-laboration to address integrated servicesand professional development for teach-ers and human service workers. TheAHS and SEA (specifically, its specialeducation and teaching and learningunits) are looking at strategic communityplanning for workers in both areas. Theyaim to coordinate and eliminate anyoverlap in the work that both agenciesare doing in the communities, and toidentify issues that cut across bothdisciplines.

Teacher Certification Policies.Teachers must complete portfolios attheir undergraduate institutions beforethey may obtain initial licenses. Stan-dards board approval of a teacherpreparation program is contingent uponincluding beginning teacher portfoliosas a part of the program. New teachersreceive a two-year, level-one "BeginningEducator" license. The state has notmandated the support of new teachers.

After teachers receive their level-two or "Professional Educator" license,they must develop and implement aseven-year Individual Professional De-velopment Plan (IPDP) and portfolio.IPDPs are based on the teacher'sreflection on strengths and weaknesses,and the potential impact of professionaldevelopment activities on student learn-ing. The state Standards Board recom-mends that teachers incorporate schooland district goals into their IPDPs. Theteacher decides whether or not toinvolve a principal or other administratorin the design of the plan. These plans aremonitored and approved by the LSB,which recommends teachers to theStandards Board for relicensure.

During the seven-year period of theIPDP, teachers must acquire ninerelicensure credits per endorsement.College credits can be used to satisfy therequirement, but are not the onlyactivities that apply. Credits can beaccumulated through LSB-approved ac-tivity, such as action research, orthrough other "new learning" activitiesthat a teacher may present to the LSB.According to one Vermont educator, theLSB will approve a learning activity as

long as the teacher can documentanswers to the questionsHow do youexpect to benefit students? and Whatnew things did you learn from thisexperience?

Teachers are required to spread thenine credits over the five standardsadopted by the Standards Board:

Learning, or work in a teacher'sspecific content area;

Professional knowledge, or work inthe area of pedagogy;

Colleagueship, or work that in-volves other teachers;

Advocacy, or work that involves thelarger community in local educationissues and advocates the educa-tional health of students; and

Accountability, or the portfoliopresented to a teacher's peers or theLSB.

State-Supported Programs. The SEAOffice of Teaching and Learning hastraditionally provided teacher profes-

Key Principles and Recommended Guidelines for Professional Development

Key Principles:

is a dynamic, active process that encourages reflection;addresses the needs of educators, enhancing their knowledge and skills and thus the quality of student learning;addresses one or more of the five professional standards, all of which are addressed in the portfolio;embodies both non-traditional and traditional experiencesrisk taking is valued and encouraged;includes experiences that may not directly apply to the goals stated in an educator's Individual ProfessionalDevelopment Plan and may not receive licensing credit, but are nonetheless worthy and should be documented.

Recommended Guidelines:

Is the experience consistent with key principles?Does the experience address the individual's professional development goals?Are there outcomes for the educator and/or student that can be implemented, assessed, and documented by theprofessional?Is the professional development experience challenging to the individual, and does it result in professional growth?Is there documentation to support the request for credit that does not rely solely on the counting of hours?

Source: "Professional Development for Educators in Vermont." Vermont Standards Board for Professional Educators andthe Vermont Consortium for Professional Development.

IS 2

sional development for SEA initiativesand regulations. One SEA respondentestimated that 80 percent of SEAconsultants provide continuing educa-tion for teachers. The SEA also providesin-service events for teachers on aregular basis.

Vermont's Portfolio Networks con-sist of groups of teachers organized bythe state for professional developmentspecifically related to the portfolioassessment program. The regionalnetworks were organized in 1991 whenportfolio assessment was implemented.Each of the 17 regions has networkleaders in math and writing and foreighth-, fourth-, and fifth-grade teach-ers; most of the leaders are classroomteachers. The scheduling and locationlogistics of Network meetings arehandled by the SEA. Network leaderswork with the SEA to develop an agendafor the grade-level meetings held three orfour times each year. The meetingsconcentrate on scoring training and onmath instructional training to helpstudents create their portfolios.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Vermont participates in anumber of foundation sponsored andfederally sponsored initiatives that haveprofessional development components.These include: the Carnegie MiddleGrades School State Policy initiative;Goals 2000 funding for local schooldistricts; and a professional develop-ment school in Montpelier supported byGoals 2000 funds.

In 1993, a Statewide SystemicInitiative grant from the National ScienceFoundation established VISMT at theVermont Technical College. VISMT hasactively promoted and provided profes-sional development in math and science.VISMT holds summer institutes focusedon math and science content andpedagogy, and has served staff fromover 55 percent of Vermont's schools. Itis estimated that VISMT has served morethan 10 percent of the state's schoolteachers. VISMT has organized confer-ences and sent VISMT staff to workdirectly in schools, particularly in thoseschools that send teams to summerinstitutes. VISMT publishes a resourcedirectory of science, math, and technol-ogy programs and of professionaldevelopment opportunities.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state education budget dedicated toprofessional development, although thestate funds professional developmentactivities through local contracts. Thestate Portfolio Networks receive approxi-mately $45,000 per year from the generalfund. The SEA vocational and specialeducation divisions dispense funds forteacher professional development. Nodollar figure is available for the totalamount the state spends for professionaldevelopment.

Federal Funds. The state receivesEisenhower and Title 1 funds that areused to support local professionaldevelopment. Vermont received$1,243,473 in Eisenhower funding in FY1995. Vermont gives Goals 2000 grantsto local districts and other institutionsfor professional development. In Year 2,Vermont received $1,272,847 in Goals2000 funding, $60,000 of which wasawarded in professional developmentgrants to local districts, an increase from$40,000 awarded in Year 1.

Local Funds. The amount spentlocally including local and federal fundsfor professional development is esti-mated at $3 million. The state does notmandate how much local districts mustspend on professional development forteachers, although the relicensure lawsrequire districts to support teacherprofessional development. Responsibil-ity for ensuring that teachers arelicensed has historically fallen to thedistricts.


State regulations require supervi-sory unions to establish LSBs, whichgovern teacher standards and profes-sional development policy. The LSBsapprove and review teachers' IPDPs,which are required for relicensure,recommend teachers to the state Stan-dards Board for relicensure, and set localrelicensure requirements. Teachers,chosen by their peers, make up the

183

majority of each LSB membership. Fiveregional standards boards, separate fromthe LSBs, set standards for administra-tors.

While districts are not required toadopt professional development plans,increasingly they are developing strate-gic plans for improving education.Although the state does not mandate aminimum number of days, eight is theestimated number of days typicallydedicated to professional developmentin a school year.

The responsibility for selecting in-service topics varies by district: somelarger districts have curriculum directorsresponsibile for organizing in-serviceactivities; some district-level committeesdetermine topics and providers; and,sometimes, the LSBs provide input onthe selection of in-service topics.


Teachers bargain for professionaldevelopment at the local level. Eachlocal contract establishes its own pack-age of reimbursements and salaryincrements. Teachers are commonlyreimbursed for college tuition, althougheach district has different criteria gov-erning how many credits it will reim-burse, whether credits must be taken ingraduate courses, and the cap placed onthe total allowed for reimbursement.

Teachers receive salary incrementsfor college coursework, although notusually for other forms of professionaldevelopment.


The Vermont chapter of the NationalEducation Association conducts a two-day conference every year that includesprofessional development activities.Other teacher organizations, includingsubject organizations in the arts, math,English, library/media, (said to be veryactive) and gifted and talented, in thestate also provide professional network-ing, sharing, and learning. SeveralVermont schools participate in the

3

Vermont Alliance, which is attempting toform a statewide network of schools. Anetwork of Vermont schools participatein the Carnegie Middle Grades Initiative.

Institutions of higher educationseem to be the largest providers ofprofessional development for Vermontteachers. They provide the traditionalgraduate and undergraduate coursework,administer professional developmentschools, and have representatives onthe state Standards Board. Some highereducation institutions have representa-tion on LSBs as well. The University ofVermont sponsors regional summerSchool Development Institutes to whichschools send teams with a specificagenda to accomplish, and universityfaculty provide targeted guidance. Thereare several professional developmentschools across the state. The Universityof Vermont College of Education hosteda national conference in the summer of1996 for higher education and K-12partners to share their experiences andexpertise.


Peg MeyerExternal ManagerTeaching and Learning TeamVermont Department of Education120 State StreetMontpelier, VT 05620802-828-3111

Nancy HoweConsultantVermont Department of Education120 State StreetMontpelier, VT 05620802-828-2444

Bruce RichardsonSchool of EducationUniversity of Vermont309 Waterman StreetBurlington, VT05405-0160802-656-3424






1 4

0 S

VirginiaEducation Policy Context

Virginia's public K-12 systemenrolls almost 1.1 millionstudents and consists of 133

school divisions. State education codessupport local decision-making and au-tonomy. In 1993, the State Board ofEducation (SBE) proposed a reforminitiative to establish a state curriculumcalled the Common Core of Learning(CCL); however, public opposition to theproposal eventually led to its rejection.Attention to the issue of curriculumstandards was renewed in 1994, whenGovernor Allen appointed a 49-membereducation advisory panel, the Commis-sion on Champion Schools, to developrecommendations for improving theacademic performance of Virginia's stu-dents. The Commission issued itsrecommendations, which focused onfive areas: safety, accountability (in-cluding standards, assessment, publicreporting, and accreditation), planning,parental and community involvement,and technology.

The existing Virginia Standards ofLearning were revised and adopted bythe SBE in June of 1995. The newstandards reflect high expectations andacademic rigor in the content areas ofEnglish, mathematics, science, history,the social sciences, and technology.The newly adopted standards weredeveloped by teams that includedpracticing educators, among other mem-



bers. The Virginia Department of Ed-ucation (referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) is overseeingthe process of creating a new stateassessment system, which will be usedto monitor the performance of studentsin relation to the standards. Passing thenew 1 1 th-grade assessment tests will bea diploma requirement for students.Other consequences related to the newtesting system, whether at the student orschool level, have not yet been deter-mined. Field testing of the new as-sessments is scheduled for the spring of1997, with the first operational adminis-tration of the tests scheduled in thespring of 1998.

In January of 1996, the legislaturecalled for the establishment of theVirginia Commission on the Future ofPublic Education. The 21-member Com-mission is composed of 13 electedofficials (representing the state houseand senate and the governor's office),the secretary of education, the SBEpresident, the SEA superintendent, thecollege chancellor, the higher educationcouncil director, and eight citizens. Theeight citizens must include a publicschool teacher, a parent, a schoolprincipal, a division superintendent, anda business representative. The Commis-sion is charged with developing a visionfor public education that providesstrategies for implementing the revisedstandards, improving teacher prepara-tion and in-service training to assist

students in learning the standards,providing incentives and rewards toschools, enhancing workplace prepara-tion for high school students, usinginstructional technology, and enhancingcommunity involvement, among otherareas. An interim report from theCommission is expected in 1997, and fi-nal recommendations will be issued in1998.


Virginia's legislature passed resolu-tion HJR 52 in February of 1996 toacknowledge "the inestimable value ofinservice training programs to theprofessional development of schoolemployees . . . and that the Common-wealth be committed to the continuedprofessional development of personsinvolved in public education at alllevels." Although the state has notissued standards for professional devel-opment, the SEA is encouraging localsystems to identify needs and to assumeleadership in providing direction to thestate on professional development is-sues and activities. According to theconsolidated plan for Virginia education,which the SEA submitted to the U.S.Department of Education in December of1995, the state's education reforminitiative addresses five focal areas:safety, accountability, standards, plan-ning, parental and community involve-

'This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

1 S 5

ment, and technology. The plan alsostates that the success of those reformsrequire "that professional developmentactivities conducted and/or supportedby the Department should be plannedby schools and divisions and reflecttheir specific needs." As such, the SEAwill employ a regional professionaldevelopment delivery system, whereindistricts and schools are responsible fordesigning "collaborative professionaldevelopment plans." Based on theseeight regional professional developmentplans (which will be continually updatedthrough a local decision-making pro-cess), the SEA will conduct activitiesand provide technical assistance. Theregional professional development de-livery model is being phased in and isexpected to be fully operational by the1998-99 school year.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheAdvisory Board on Teacher Educationand Licensure (ABTEL), established bythe Code of Virginia, serves in an ad-visory capacity to the SBE and submitsrecommendations on policies regardingthe qualification, examination, licensure,and regulation of school personnel;standards for approval of preserviceprograms; reciprocal approval of prepa-ration programs; and other relatedmatters. Appointed for three-year termsby the SBE, this 19-member group iscomprised, by law, of ten active class-room teachers (from both public andprivate schools), a principal, a localsuperintendent, a local director of humanresources, a school board member, aparent, a university/college representa-tive, a business representative, and amember at large. In 1994, legislation waspassed (RB 1056) to replace ABTEL withan autonomous Professional StandardsBoard, which would have been autho-rized to set teacher certification policy;however, this measure was vetoed bythe governor due to perceived constitu-tional violations of current Virginia law.The SEA administers all SBE regulationspertaining to the preparation and licen-sure of school personnel in Virginiathrough its Office of Teacher Educationand Licensure, which also providesadministrative support to ABTEL.

2

Upon completion of all preservicerequirements, beginning teachers areissued a Collegiate Professional License.Teachers who have obtained a master'sdegree are eligible to receive a Post-graduate Professional License. Bothlicenses may be renewed every fiveyears in accordance with Virginia'sRecertification Point System, created in1990. The point system requires eachlicense holder to accrue a total of 180points during the five-year licenseperiod. There are ten options for earningrenewal points: (1) college credit; (2)educational agency staff developmentprograms; (3) attending professionalconferences; (4) peer observations; (5)educational travel; (6) publication of anarticle; (7) publication of a book; (8)mentorship/supervision; (9) pursuit ofan educational project; and (10) curricu-lum development. License holderswithout a master's degree must earn aminimum of 90 points by taking collegecoursework in their endorsed contentareas. The remaining 90 points may beearned through one or more of theremaining options. The renewal pointsystem was evaluated in 1994-95. Sur-vey responses of 1,000 teachers and 100central office personnel showedhigh degrees of satisfaction with thepoint system among both groups. Thetypical mode of satisfying recertificationrequirements is credit for collegecoursework.

During its 1996 session, the VirginiaGeneral Assembly appropriated fundsfor two new grant programs that supportprofessional development for licensedteachers at the beginning and advancedlevels of their careers. State grants arenow available to partially support astatewide mentor teacher program. Dis-tricts are required to submit an applica-tion and provide matching support inorder to receive this grant. Participatingdistricts must provide an end-of-yearreport on their induction activities: thenumber of mentor teachers trained andcompensation received, the number ofteachers who received support frommentors, a description of training activi-ties, linkages with universities, evalua-tion data, and program expenditures.The second incentive grant program wasestablished for teachers who are pursu-

I

ing National Board Certification. Up to75 grants of $1,000 will be awarded toindividual teachers to help defrayNational Board assessment costs.

State-Supported Programs. Inaddition to its new regional professionaldevelopment system, the SEA alsosponsors statewide in-service training toincrease the pool of qualified personnelin critical teacher shortage areas. TheSEA recently piloted a field-basedendorsement training program for spe-cial education teachers and has offeredtuition-free coursework for speech pa-thologists. Grants are made to regionalclusters of school divisions to supportin-service training for special educationpersonnel. The SEA also offerscontinuing education courses related tocritical information areas. For example,during the 1995-96 year, the SEAconducted institutes on managing stu-dents with challenging behaviors. Thesecourses are available to any schoolpersonnel who choose to participate.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. The Virginia Quality Educa-tion in Sciences and Technology Initia-tive (V-QUEST) was created in 1991through a five-year $9.6-million grantfrom the National Science Foundation(NSF). V-QUEST consists of sevenprogram components: (1) lead teacherdevelopment; (2) models for preserviceand in-service activities; (3) instructionalmaterials; (4) educational leadership andadministrative support; (5) communityaction; (6) technology; and (7) assess-ment. Lead teacher development is V-QUEST' s primary professional develop-ment component. The goal is for everyelementary and middle school in thestate to have a designated lead teacher;nearly 500 teachers have been trainedthus far. Lead teachers in mathematicsand science attend two-week summerinstitutes and serve as facilitators andtrainers of other teachers in theirbuildings during the school year. AnNSF evaluation revealed that leadteachers credited this training withcausing their increased use ofmanipulatives in mathematics and"hands-on discovery learning" in sci-ence. V-QUEST training for high schoolteachers is offered through the pre-service/in-service component. Profes-

sional development opportunities withinthis component range from attending anumber of one-day workshops, toworking with a committee of educators,to writing new course curricula, toconducting research projects with uni-versity staff. Over 75 secondaryteachers have participated in theseactivities.

Virginia has not applied for, nor hasit received, a Goals 2000 grant.

Public Funds forProfessional Development

State Funds. Funds for professionaldevelopment are included in the state'sbasic aid allocation to each local schooldivision. In 1995-96, the state's basic aidallocation provided $219 for professionaldevelopment per FTE. These funds maybe used for any in-service purpose, suchas reimbursing teachers for coursescompleted, conducting workshops, orcontracting with institutions of highereducation. Virginia's legislature appro-priated $300,000 to support mentorteacher programs and $150,000 forNational Board incentive grants duringthe 1996-98 biennium.

Federal Funds. Virginia's consoli-dated state application to the U.S.Department of Education indicates thatthe SEA will "reserve one percent (1%)or less" of federal grant funds (otherthan Goals 2000 and Eisenhower monies)for professional development. Of thisreserve, 5 percent will be used toconduct regional workshops and insti-tutes on federal programs and otherSEA-sponsored professional develop-ment. During the 1995-96 school year,Virginia received $3.9 million inEisenhower funds.

Local Funds. In order to receivestate funds for their mentoring programs,school divisions must provide matchingallocations. The state also offers in-centive grants to school divisions toensure that each school has an auto-mated library/media center. Schooldivisions that accept these grants mustassure that 5 percent of the grant is usedto provide in-service education intechnology.


In-service activities and continuingprofessional development after apreservice program are primarily theresponsibility of individual school divi-sions, although the SEA supports manylocal efforts at the request of superinten-dents. The Code of Virginia requiresthat each local school board provide aprogram of professional development toassist teachers and principals in meetinglicensure renewal requirements, to helpthem acquire the skills needed to workwith gifted students and students withdisabilities, and to increase studentachievement. Each school division, in itsannual special education plan, mustdescribe professional development ac-tivities for special education, relatedservices, and general education person-nel working with students with disabili-ties.

The mandated school year calendarconsists of 180 instructional days, withan additional ten days specified forprofessional development and ten fordiscretionary days. Set-aside days forprofessional development are supportedby a combination of state and localfunds.


Advancement on the state salaryscale is awarded for the master's degreeand for accumulated years of service.Districts generally do not offer tuitionreimbursement to teachers.


The Virginia Education Association(VEA) allocates $500,000 yearly forprofessional development for its 52,000members. The VEA conducts work-shops and conferences on a variety ofinstructional issues, as well as on otherrelevant education issues, such asschool violence, inclusion, school law,

-1 0 ." 40 i

and instructional strategies for effectiveteaching in the classroom. The VEA alsoprovides leadership training for itsmembers and publishes a magazine andnewspaper during the school year.

Approved teacher education pro-grams are available at 37 institutions ofhigher education in Virginia. Teacherpreparation institutions assist schooldivisions in providing schoolwide pro-fessional development. Other sources ofsupport for teachers' professional devel-opment, including collaborative incen-tives and teacher networks, are fre-quently used in Virginia.


Thomas A. ElliottDivision Chief for ComplianceVirginia Department of EducationP.O. Box 2120Richmond, VA 23216-2120804-371-2522

Jo-Lynn DeMaryDivision Chief of InstructionVirginia Department of EducationP.O. Box 2120Richmond, VA 22316-2120804-225-3252






BEST COPY AVAILABLE


WashingtonEducation Policy Context

Washington State's public edu-cation system is composedof 296 districts and 1,843

schools, serving nearly one millionstudents. Strong local control with highlevels of district autonomy are firmly andproudly held traditions. In 1991, then-Governor Booth Gardner initiated, incollaboration with teachers' organiza-tions, a proactive agenda to design avision for public education policy in thestate.

The Governor's Council on Educa-tion Reform and Funding (GCERF) wascreated in May of 1991 to establisheducational priorities focusing on per-formance-based student learning, com-prehensive services for children andfamilies, strengthening teacher educa-tion and professional development, andpromoting site-based decision making.GCERF's recommendations guided thedevelopment of the Student LearningImprovement Act (ESHB 1209), passedby the legislature in 1993. Thislegislation represents the state's mostsignificant education policy initiative,reflecting a concerted effort to improvelearning for all students and supportinga shift to performance-based learning.ESHB 1209 appropriated $75 millionduring its first bienniumthe largestfunding commitment ever made by thestate for education improvement. Acomprehensive reform bill, it created the



following programs: a state-level com-mission to oversee the development ofacademic standards and a new assess-ment system; a school performancereporting system; school-level grants,called Student Learning ImprovementGrants (SLIGs), to support local effortsto meet student learning goals; Readi-ness-to-Learn grants, which supportcoordinated services for students andfamilies through local consortiums; andthe Center for the Improvement ofStudent Learning (CISL) at the Office ofthe Superintendent of Public Instruction(referred to hereafter as the stateeducation agency, or SEA) to providetechnical assistance and promote paren-tal involvement.

The Commission on Student Learn-ing (CSL) was created in 1992 by SSB5953. ESHB 1209 "fine tuned" theauthorization of the CSL, charging thecommission with overseeing the processof identifying content standards anddeveloping new student assessment andschool accountability systems. The CSLis an 11-member, state-level body whosemembers are appointed by the governorand the State Board of Education (SBE).CSL is expected to make standards andassessments available to schools by thefall of 1998, with statewide implementa-tion by the year 2000. CSL focused ondeveloping content standards, calledEssential Academic Learning require-ments, during its first two years and isnow concentrating on designing a newassessment system.

The State's Role inProfessional Development

In August of 1992, the SBE, incollaboration with the GCERF, formed aProfessional Development Group toreview existing policies and providerecommendations for the developmentof a performance-based teacher certifica-tion system. In response to the SBE-GCERF findings, the SBE establishedthe Washington Advisory Council forProfessional Teaching Standards(WACPTS) in 1995 to further explore anddesign standards for the new teachercertification system.

WACPTS relied on varioussourcessuch as teacher focus groups,national meetings, the Interstate NewTeacher Assessment and Support Con-sortium (INTASC) standards, the Na-tional Board for Professional TeachingStandards, and research expertstodevelop its initial recommendations,issued in January of 1996. If WACPTSstandards are adopted by the SBE, theywill be field tested from 1997 to 2000 andtake effect in 2000. Washington ed-ucators believe that the new certificationsystem will provide the frameworknecessary for state policy makers, localschool systems, and higher educationinstitutions to align teacher professionalgrowth with ESHB1209 goals and for thestate to allocate resources to meet thisend.

This profile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Polity Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Policy- Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education ageng in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solelythose of the authors.

168

Teacher Certification Policies. Un-der current teacher certification policies,beginning teachers are issued an initialcertificate, which is valid for four years.In 1984, the state created the TeacherAssistance Program (TAP), which is astate-funded, one-year program for be-ginning teachers. District participationin TAP is voluntary. TAP teachersparticipate in training and peer observa-tions and work with an assigned mentorteacher throughout their first year. TAPresources are also made available toexperienced teachers who are in need ofadditional assistance. The SEA reportsthat, during the 1994-95 year, 500teacher-mentor teams (representing morethan 50 percent of all districts) partici-pated in TAP. Since the 1995-96 year,districts have had the option of adminis-tering TAP resources and activitiesthemselves or contracting these servicesthrough their regional Education ServiceDistricts (ESDs).

To advance to a continuing certifi-cate, a teacher must have 180 days ofteaching experience (in or out of state),45 quarter hours of graduate-level (orupper-division) study beyond thebachelor's degree, two endorsements,and a minimum of three credits ofcoursework in issues related to abuse.The continuing certificate is renewableevery five years upon completion of 150clock hours of continuing education.

WACPTS is developing recommen-dations for a new second-level certifica-tion process. Upon completion of anSBE-approved teacher preparation pro-gram, beginning teachers would beissued a five-year Residency Certificateand be required to participate in acollaboratively developed in-service pro-gram. After two years of teachingexperience and upon meeting perfor-mance standards in the areas of effectiveteaching, professional development, andleadership and submitting a professionalgrowth plan, teachers would be eligiblefor the Professional Certificate. Profes-sional growth activities would consist ofcollege courses, in-service activities,and independent study that reflect thestandards for professional certification.Standards for a third level, the optionalProfessional Career Certificate, are stillunder consideration by WACPTS.

While WACPTS was formed specifi-cally to develop recommendations forthe new certification system, the Profes-sional Education Advisory Committee(PEAC) has existed for nearly 50 years toserve as the SBE standing committee onoverarching matters pertaining to thepreparation and certification of schooleducators. Reconstituted by the SBE in1995, PEAC now consists of 36 membersrepresenting institutions of higher edu-cation, professional associations, schooladministrators, local boards of educa-tion, independent schools, the businesscommunity, other lay organizations, andSBE members.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA offers professional developmentthrough various categorical programs(e.g., special education, Title I, andbilingual education). A significant por-tion of state-sponsored professionaldevelopment is coordinated throughnine regionally located ESDs, whichserve as resource support centers torespond to the professional develop-ment and technical assistance needs ofteachers and administrators in theirregions. Each ESD houses a state-funded Professional Development Cen-ter which, by law, is governed by an in-service committee composed of ESDstaff, district administrators and teach-ers, and a college or university represen-tative.

The SEA also houses the Center forthe Improvement of Student Learning(CISL), which is responsible for provid-ing advice and technical assistanceregarding the state's performance-basededucation system to parents, educators,and other community members. CISLdisseminates information on Wash-ington's education reform efforts andprovides best practices research andadvice that can be used to develop andimplement school improvement plans,school-based decision making, andcommunity involvement. During the1994-95 school year, CISL contractedwith the ESDs for several technicalassistance projects. In 1996, thelegislature passed HB 2909, "The Read-ing Bill," which directs the CISL todevelop and implement a process foridentifying effective reading programs

189

and to provide teacher training in thosepractices.

The CSL has contracted with theRiverside Publishing Company to coor-dinate teacher training activities for thestate's new assessment system. Thistraining will be conducted through 15regional (plus one SEA) EssentialLearning and Assessment TrainingCenters. The Centers are housed withinthe nine ESDs and in other existingschool district alliances. Center staffconduct training sessions for district-level teams which, in turn, providetraining to their colleagues at the localsite. During the 1995-96 school year,1,000 educators were trained by regionalcenter teams. Eventually, every districtin the state will have a team trained toprovide local support for the EssentialLearning requirements and new assess-ment system. Training costs are dis-tributed among the CSL, the districts,and the regional centers.

The CSL Elementary Teacher Insti-tute is a week-long summer institutedeveloped in 1995 to help elementaryteachers understand how to use theEssential Learning requirements forplanning and instruction. Instituteactivities are held at each of the nineESDs, and clock hours are awarded. Atrainer-of-trainers model is employed toencourage institute participants to shareinformation with, and teach new skillsto, their colleagues. Approximately 500teachers participated in the summer of1996 institutes.

The CSL also sponsors an annualcapacity-building conference in collabo-ration with Central Washington Univer-sity. The conference is designed toincrease the awareness and knowledgeof the Commission's work and to gatherinput from educators on the EssentialLearning requirements and assessmentsystem. The conference agenda isorganized to encourage district teammembers to take information back to theirdistricts and share it with others. In itsthird year (spring of 1996), the confer-ence attracted 1,400 participants; ap-proximately one-third were teachers.

The Washington State TechnologyPlan for K-12 Common Schools waslaunched during the 1994-95 school yearto provide schools with financial and

technical assistance to implement tech-nology-related instruction. Each schoolreceived $20.61 per student, and eachESD was required to establish aneducational technology support center.According to an SEA report, 300classrooms across the state implementedonline curriculum projects in 1994-95.

The Paraeducator Training Programprovides training for classroom assis-tants and includes a training componentfor teachers on how to work withparaprofessionals to enhance classroominstruction. Over 3,000 paraprofession-als and 1,000 teachers (representing 200districts) received training through thisprogram in 1994-95. The program isimplemented through the ProfessionalDevelopment Centers located at theregional ESDs.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Washington is using a largeportion of its Goals 2000 grant (90percent) to award SLIGs to districts,schools, and institutions of highereducation for the purpose of providing"teacher preservice training, staff devel-opment, and local reform planning andimplementation to help students meetthe student learning goals." Goals 2000subgrants for school improvement havebeen awarded to 172 districts, impactingan estimated 10,000 teachers.


State Funds. The Inservice TrainingAct of 1977 authorized state funding forprofessional development. Althoughthis legislation was never fully funded,state funds have been appropriated forthis purpose every year since 1977.ESHB1209 includes an appropriation offunds for SLIGs to be distributed toschools. Each school is eligible toreceive a SLIG allocation equivalent to$62.99 per FTE employee. The SLIGallocation in 1995-96 totaled $30 million;it is estimated that 75 percent of SLIG-funded activities were related to profes-sional development.

State funds generated by teachercertification fees amount to approxi-mately $500,000 annually. By law, thesefunds are applied equally to support

preservice programs and in-service ac-tivities. The in-service allocation isdistributed among the nine ESDs tosupport their staff development activi-ties. This allocation may be used forESD-sponsored professional develop-ment programs or issued as grants todistricts and schools.

The Teacher Assistance Programreceives an average annual appropria-tion of $1.6 million per year. Districtsreceive funding based on the number ofnew teachers. Mentors and beginningteachers receive a stipend. In 1993, thelegislature also appropriated $400,000 tosupport Collaborative Professional De-velopment School Pilot Projects and $2.1million for the Washington State Tech-nology Plan.

In 1994-95 the state also funded theCollaborative Professional DevelopmentSchool Pilot Project to encourage part-nerships among institutions of highereducation, K-12 schools, and ESDs (seebelow). Four grants were awarded,ranging from $37,000 to $214,000.

Federal Funds. The TechnologyPlan is funded by a $3.9-million grantfrom the U.S. Department of Education.In 1995-96, Washington State received a$4.1-million Eisenhower ProfessionalDevelopment grant and a $6.7-millionGoals 2000 grant, a portion of which wasused to support local professionaldevelopment initiatives.

Local Funds. Most districts rely onblock grants from the state, local districtfunds, and federal sources to fund theirprofessional development programs.


Since the 1990-91 school year,districts have been authorized to imple-ment a professional growth program asdesigned by committees of classroomteachers, support personnel, centraloffice administrators, and building ad-ministrators. The professional growthplan must be based on needs asidentified through personnel reviewsand evaluations, parent and studentinput, district and individual schoolimprovement goals, and needs assess-

190

ments. Districts may award clock hoursfor local in-service activities.

The law requires that a minimum of58 percent of SLIGs be spent at thebuilding level for planning, staff devel-opment, and other activities to improvestudent learning that are consistent withstudent learning goals. Schools arerequired to include information in theirannual performance report describingSLIG expenditures and the impact ofthose activities in advancing theiroverall school improvement plans. Anamendatory act to ESHB 1209 requiresthe SEA to provide annual reports to thelegislature concerning the status anduse of SLIGs.

In-service days are not mandated bythe state. SEA officials report that, in1994-95 and 1995-96, the SLIGs providedthe equivalent of three additional daysfor each teacher to engage in building-based planning and professional devel-opment. Professional development ac-tivities reported most frequently by theschools focused on computers andtechnology (644 schools), integratingthe curriculum (566 schools), and stu-dent assessment (544 schools).

School districts with annual enroll-ments greater than 10,000 students tendto have in-house staff developmentprograms that are able to respond tolocal-level, in-service needs. Mostsmaller districts rely heavily on ESDsand other district-level consortia groupsas their primary source for teacher in-service activities.


The state teacher salary allocationformula is based on years of service,degree held, and credits earned. Wash-ington allows teachers the option ofapplying clock hours accumulatedthrough other types of professionaldevelopment toward advancement onthe salary scale. Teachers earning tenclock hours in a state-approved trainingprogram are eligible for a one-credit stepincrease.

Teachers generally do not receivereimbursement for tuition costs or otherprofessional development expenses.

Some districts, at their discretion orthrough collective bargaining agree-ments, may provide this type of compen-sation. However, many districts fundjob-related professional developmentand, in cooperation with a college oruniversity, offer a credit option (paid bythe teacher) at a reduced tuition rate,since the workshop presenter's fee ispaid by the sponsoring school district.


The Washington Education Asso-ciation (WEA) sponsors an array ofprofessional development activities forteachers. Through its office of Instruc-tion and Human Relations, WEA utilizesa "peer teaching cadre model" thatprovides workshops and course offer-ings developed and presented bypractitioners. The focus of WEAtraining activities is determined by asurvey of the needs and interests of itsmore than 65,000 members. Participantshave a choice of receiving college creditor clock hours. Since January of 1995,over 34,000 clock hours have beengranted. In addition to courses andseminars offered throughout the schoolyear, WEA also sponsors a series oftwo-day conferences.

The state-funded Collaborative Pro-fessional Development School PilotProject, initiated during the 1994-95school year, has resulted in the creationof four school-university partnershipsinvolving 22 districts, three universities,and four ESDs. Washington StateUniversity (WSU) is involved in three ofthese partnerships. The professionaldevelopment school in the RitzvilleSchool District represents a partnershipamong the district, ESD 101 (Spokane),and WSU, in which WSU studentteachers learn the district's performance-based education model and Ritzville staffparticipate in ongoing forums on educa-tion reform. WSU also partnered withESD 112 (Vancouver) and three districts(Vancouver, Evergreen, and Kelso) toestablish four professional developmentschools that offer workshops on assess-ment and conduct research on classroomtechniques and student learning. A third

partnership among WSU, ESD 123(Walla Walla), and 15 school districtscreated a professional developmentschool that is preparing paraeducatorsto qualify for certification. The fourthpartnership involves Central Washing-ton University, North Central ESD 171(Wenatchee), Wenatchee Valley Col-lege, and three school districts (Chelan,Manson, and Wenatchee). This partner-ship focuses on minority candidaterecruitment and support at the preservicelevel and assisting current classroomteachers in obtaining master's degrees.

The Washington Alliance for BetterSchools was created in 1992 as anaffiliate of the National Alliance forRestructuring Education (NARE) andrepresents a partnership among fiveschool districts and the University ofWashington. Since 1995, the Alliancehas been involved with the NewAmerican School Development Corpora-tion (NASDC). Alliance members poolresources, collaborate on curricula de-velopment and instructional strategies,and provide a network for educators tolearn about innovative school improve-ment strategies. The Alliance has cre-ated four Teacher Development Centers(TDCs), which are housed at schoolsites. The TDCs provide 12-weekpracticums during the school year andsummer institutes for teacher teams fromAlliance districts. Participants in theAlliance pledge a minimum commitmentof $10 per student for professionaldevelopment. Funding support forAlliance activities is also generatedthrough grants from NARE, NASDC,The Boeing Company, Apple Comput-ers, Washington State Goals 2000, andSLIG funds.

The University of Washington Ex-tension Office, in collaboration with theCSL, initiated Project REAL in 1995. Theproject provides technical assistance todistrict- and school-based staff inplanning and implementing the EssentialLearning requirements and new assess-ment system. Fourteen districts partici-pated in the first year of the program, and12 additional sites were added for 1996-97. Approximately 150 educators partici-pate directly in Project REAL trainingactivities, for which clock hours anduniversity course credit are awarded.


Susan TriminghamChairWashington Advisory Council forProfessional Teaching StandardsBellingham School District619 15th StreetBellingham, WA 98225360-734-4462

Theodore E. AndrewsDirectorProfessional Education & CertificationOffice of Superintendent of PublicInstructionP.O. Box 47200Olympia, WA 98504360-753-3222

Donna DunningDirector,The Learning and Public Policy CenterWashington Education Association33434 8th Avenue SouthFederal Way, WA 98003206-941-6700







West VirginiaEducation Policy Context

West Virginia is a rural state thatserves 314,383 students in itspublic education system. Each

of the counties has its own schooldistrict. The State Board of Education(SBE) is a constitutional body thatappoints the state superintendent ofschools and has responsibility for K-12public education. The SBE also setsprofessional development policy foreducators. However, an autonomousWest Virginia Educators' ProfessionalStandards Board (EPSB), established in1994, also governs "the educationprofession, including the establishmentof standards for entrance into andcontinued membership in the profes-sion."2 The two boards have beenworking collaboratively to define theirrespective roles and responsibilities.

The previous Governor establishedan additional cabinet-level positionresponsible for moving his initiativesthrough the legislature. The Governormaintains a close working relationshipwith the state superintendent of schools;the cabinet officer responsible foreducation has increasingly focused onissues of higher education.

The state has recently focused onimproving technology in its schoolsystems. One program provided com-puters for every K-6 classroom in thestate, and new legislation will providecomputers for classrooms in the middle



and high schools.The Jobs ThroughEducation Act builds partnerships be-tween business and education institu-tions to coordinate education program-ming to meet the future needs of the workplace.


West Virginia's 1990 educationreform legislation created a comprehen-sive state policy on professional devel-opment for educators. The policyrequired every school to establish afaculty senate and a school improvementcouncil, which occurred in 1992. SchoolImprovement Councils are responsiblefor developing and implementingschoolwide professional developmentplans. School Improvement Councilsand Faculty Senates are comprised ofteachers, administrators, parents, andother community representatives. Thisreform legislation also created theProfessional Development Center. Leg-islation in 1994 created the EPSB. Thestate occasionally requires specific typesof professional development activitiesfor teachers, such as HIV education, newtextbook orientation, or staff evaluationfor administrators.

Teacher Certification Policies. InWest Virginia, an initial teacher's licenseis valid for three years. To renew,teachers must complete six credit hoursof either undergraduate or graduate

coursework within the three-year periodand obtain three years of teachingexperience. New teachers must alsocomplete the Beginning Educator Intern-ship Program, a program developedlocally according to state guidelines.The Internship program primarily in-volves assigning a mentor to work withnew teachers for one year.

The Professional Certificate is a five-year license. Teachers must complete sixcredit hours of approved collegecoursework to renew the ProfessionalCertificate. College credit courses areoffered through the Center for Profes-sional Development and eight RegionalEducational Service Agencies (RESAs)for a small fee, or sometimes free ofcharge. Conferences and researchactivities do not currently count asprofessional development for recertifica-tion. However, the SBE has presented aproposal that would allow teachers touse professional development activitiesother than college coursework to meetrecertification requirements. For licenserenewal, teachers also must submit aletter of recommendation from theircounty superintendent regarding theirsuccessful teaching experience. Afterteachers renew the five-year certificatetwice, or obtain a master's degree, theyare awarded a Permanent Certificate,which bestows life-time certification.

EPSB establishes standards forentering and for continued membershipin the teaching profession. It sets


192

standards for teacher preparation pro-grams in higher education institutionsand for the assessment of teachershoping to enter the profession, TheEPSB, under the direction of the SBE,determines regulations for recertifica-tion. The EPSB has statutory authorityto issue, renew, suspend, and revoketeacher licenses. The EPSB membershipis primarily teachers.

State-Supported Programs. Whenthe Legislature passed the state's majoreducation reform package in 1990, theGovernor created the Professional De-velopment Center (referred to as "theCenter"). Its mission, as stated instatute, is "to study matters relating tothe quality of teaching and managementin the schools of West Virginia and topromote the implementation of programsand practices to assure the highestquality in such teaching and manage-ment."

The Center's Policy Board, whichmeets quarterly, consists of ten mem-bers, including the state superintendent,the secretaries of education and the arts(who are ex-officio members), a memberof the SBE, two teachers, and fourcitizens. The Center has an ExecutiveDirector, a full-time staff, and anadvisory council, comprised of theExecutive Director (who serves as theChair), higher education representatives,county school superintendents, schoolprincipals, and teachers.

The Center serves as a clearing-house for professional developmentinformation in the state, maintaining alarge database on topics, presenters, anda calendar of regional and state pro-grams. The 1990 Legislation required theCenter to assume the following responsi-bilities:

The Professional DevelopmentProject was initiated to studyprofessional development issues inthe state, identifying characteristicsof appropriate performance for pro-fessional school personnel andcoordinating professional educa-tion programs for teachers withthose characteristics. The Centerworks with county staff develop-ment councils to update the skills ofprofessional educators through in-

2

service activities and other pro-grams.

The Development Training Projectwas established to develop trainingin developmental instruction, withan emphasis on grades K-4.

The Professional Personnel Evalu-ation Project was formed to estab-lish programs that provide trainingin evaluation skills for administra-tive personnel who evaluate teach-ers. Administrators must attendthree-day workshops (hosted bythe Center) in order to receive theadministrative certificate. The Cen-ter provides training to classroomteachers who serve as mentors inthe Beginning Educator InternshipProgram. They provide a two-daytraining seminar for all new andmentor teachers, and have pub-lished a manual for mentors.

The Project for Instructional Re-newal through Science and Tech-nology was charged with determin-ing the most effective ways ofdelivering electronic instruction,and establishing a comprehensivelong-range plan to further thecooperation of various state agen-cies, county boards of education,and RESAs involved in distancelearning. They are responsible forencouraging the use of technologyfor educational purposes. Theultimate goal of this project is tocreate a statewide technology net-work that will link institutions ofhigher education, schools, libraries,and eventually individual homeswith software, data bases, and videolearning capabilities.

The West Virginia Advanced Place-ment Center was created to providestatewide coordination for the con-tinued growth of advanced place-ment programs in the state's highschools. The Advanced PlacementCenter assists the West VirginiaDepartment of Education, countyboards of education, higher educa-tion institutions, The College Board,and the West Virginia Advanced

3

Placement Advisory Council in allmatters related to advanced place-ment in the state, including: coordi-nating advanced placement teachertraining institutes; establishing acadre of instructors for institutes ofadvanced placement training; pro-viding follow-up teacher training inadvanced placement matters; identi-fying and obtaining funding for theproject; creating and maintaining anewsletter for networking advancedplacement teachers; conducting re-search and evaluating the state'sadvanced placement program; serv-ing as a clearinghouse for advancedplacement materials and correspon-dence; and certifying individualcourses that meet established stan-dards of advanced placement pro-grams.

The Task Force on Teacher Prepa-ration was established to reviewand identify methods for improvingteacher preparation programs. Itwas charged with delivering a reportto the Governor and legislature byDecember of 1990.

In addition to the EPSB and theProfessional Development Center, thestate offers professional developmentthrough the West Virginia Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA). TheSEA houses the Office of ProfessionalPreparation and the Office of Profes-sional Development and Recognition.The Office of Professional Preparationmanages the paperwork for the certifica-tion and recertification of educationpersonnel, and for reimbursements forteacher professional development costs.The Office of Professional Developmentand Recognition works with the Centerfor Professional Development to providetraining for mentors and other purposes.

The SEA offers workshops andinstitutes through its various divisions.Curriculum coordinators provide profes-sional development to teachers through-out the year. The state funds eightRESAs which provide professional de-velopment for educators. Each district inthe state is served by a RESA.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. West Virginia is a Goals 2000state; Goals 2000 funding supports"Education First: A Strategic Plan toAchieve Student Success." The com-prehensive plan focuses on studentachievement, parental involvement, pro-fessional development, technology, andcareer development.

West Virginia receives a NationalScience Foundation Teacher Enhance-ment grant and a Healthy Schools grant.The state participates in the InterstateNew Teacher Assessment and SupportConsortium.


State Funds. The legislature appro-priates funding for professional devel-opment in several ways. The Center forProfessional Development has received$2 million or more per year since itsinception in 1990. Eighty-five percent ofthese funds support direct services. In1995, the Center received an additional$2 million to establish a PrincipalsAcademy. The state's RESA systemreceives between $4 and $6 million peryear for its activities, which includeprofessional development. Countiesreceive formula funding for professionaldevelopment, an amount estimated to beapproximately one percent of the totalcounty budget, and described as "verysmall."

The state sets aside funding toreimburse teachers for their requiredprofessional development courses. Lastyear, the legislature appropriated$120,000 for this program. Manyteachers do not bother to apply for thereimbursement due to the paperworkinvolved and because the funds aredistributed on a first-come, first-servedbasis. State funds were reported to bethe largest source of funding forprofessional development in the state.

Federal Funds. West Virginiareceived $2,799,259 in Goals 2000 fund-ing in 1996. The bulk of this funding (90percent) supported local districts initia-tives for school improvement, profes-sional development, and preserviceeducation for teachers.

West Virginia receives Eisenhowerfunding to support professional devel-opment. A large proportion of thesefunds are dispersed to local districts orinstitutions of higher education forspecific teacher education projects. InFY 1995, West Virginia received$1,973,643 in Eisenhower funds.

Local Funds. The state requirescounties to set aside funding for thecounty staff development councils andfor teacher professional development.


The 1990 education reform legisla-tion required each district to establish acounty professional staff developmentcouncil. These councils include teach-ers, who are appointed by facultysenates, and the county superintendent,who serves as a non-voting member.They are responsible for proposing staffdevelopment programs for their district.The state mandates that one-tenth ofone percent of the county's totaloperating budget (or one-tenth of thecounty's total professional developmentbudget) be allocated to the countyprofessional development councils.

Each year, the councils createprofessional development plans for theirdistricts. These plans are not monitoredby the state, but the plans are reviewedwhen school districts undergo the stateaccreditation process every four years.However, the only requirement theymust meet is that schools set aside threedays or 18 hours per year for profes-sional development.

Professional development at thelocal level is offered through a variety ofsources: the Center for ProfessionalDevelopment; the RESAs; and institu-tions of higher education (although theyare primarily involved in preserviceeducation).


There is no collective bargaining inWest Virginia at the state or local level.The West Virginia Education Associa-

J 41

tion (WVEA) and the West VirginiaAmerican Federation of Teachers (AFT)chapter are advocacy groups that voicethe interests of teachers at the statelevel.

The state pays for the bulk of publiceducation costs, including professionaldevelopment. The state reimbursesteachers for up to 15 hours of collegecoursework per year. Some districtsreimburse teachers for professionaldevelopment expenses, but the amountand process varies from district todistrict. Teachers receive salary incre-ment increases for graduate-levelcoursework. Teachers who serve asmentors in the Beginning EducatorInternship Program are paid a $600stipend per year.

Teachers must undergo an evalua-tion process as directed by the 1990education reform legislation. Evalua-tions of educators are not linked torecertification, although they are linkedto continued employment. New teachersare evaluated twice each year, with threeclassroom observations taking placebefore each evaluation. Tenured teach-ers are evaluated once each year. Afterteachers are satisfactorily evaluated,they enter a "professional growth anddevelopment" cycle, in which they, withthe input of the school principal, setgoals and design a written plan formeeting these goals. During the secondself-assessment phase, teachers deter-mine if they have met their goals. Thisprocess is repeated over the course of ateacher's career.


The WVEA provides professionaldevelopment for educators upon re-quest, and holds conferences through-out the year for its members (althoughteachers do not receive recertificationcredit for attending these conferences).The WVEA influences state-level educa-tion policy by having representativesserve on various committees and coun-cils. The West Virginia AFT is alsoinvolved in professional development.Subject-matter col 1 aborati ves in the state

BEST COPY AVAILABLE 3

provide some professional developmentfor their members.

Teachers must obtain college cred-its for recertification. College courseworkcan be undertaken through the stateRESA system and the Center forProfessional Development for small fees.

The West Virginia Education Fundoffers grants to schools that can be usedfor professional development. AT&Tand Bell Atlantic provide free Internetaccess and software and training foreducators. IBM won the state contractfor installing computers in classrooms;as a part of this agreement, they providetraining for teachers.


Dr. Gail LooneyDirectorCenter for Professional DevelopmentThe People's Building179 Summer Street, Suite 221Charleston, WV 25301304-558-0539

Barbara BrazeauAssistant DirectorOffice of Professional PreparationWest Virginia Department of EducationBuilding 6, Room 3371900 Kanawha Blvd. EastCharleston, WV 25305-0330800-982-2378

West Virginia Educators' ProfessionalStandards Boarddo Ester Lauderman, ChairWilliamstown Elementary418 Williams AvenueWilliamstown, WV 26187304-375-7675


2Characteristics of Autonomous State TeacherProfessional Standards Boards," Connecti-cut Education Association, 1995.





1,05

IIIlb ID


WisconsinEducation Policy Context

isconsin has more than 844,000students enrolled in the 427districts of its public school

system. An ongoing debate about itseducation policy-making structure hashad implications for reform efforts. In1995, the governor signed WisconsinAct 27 into law. The law would havecreated a new executive office ofeducation, with an appointed secretaryas chief, and moved many of thefunctions of the Wisconsin Departmentof Public Instruction (referred to hereaf-ter as the state education agency, orSEA) to this new office. Although thelegislation would have maintained theexisting elected position of state super-intendent, the superintendent's staffwould have been reduced from morethan 300 to six. The law would haveestablished an education commission,chaired by the state superintendent, tofunction as the policy-making body forthe new SEA. However, all administra-tive authority would have been moved tothe new secretary of education.

A lawsuit filed by a coalition ofeducation groups challenged WisconsinAct 27, and the proposal was declaredunconstitutional by the state SupremeCourt in March of 1996. Therefore, theSEA still operates as the state's primaryeducation policy office. However,because legislators believed that theSEA would no longer function in the



same capacity, its funding has beenseverely reduced. The SEA is currentlybeing restructured.

In 1993, the state funded a perfor-mance-based assessment initiative thatwas scheduled to be administered in1996. However, the funding for thisinitiative was eliminated in 1995. TheSEA is seeking reinstatement of theprogram and encouraging schools toadopt high standards and rigorousassessments for students. The state isworking on content standards andschool-to-work initiatives, both of whichinclude professional development foreducators.

Wisconsin's best known reforminitiative is the Milwaukee voucherexperiment. In 1990, the legislaturecreated a program that provided vouch-ers so that poor families in Milwaukeemight send their children to privateschools. A total of 1,500 studentsparticipate in the program. The programis controversial and academics disputeits effectiveness. Efforts to expand thevoucher program have been blocked bythe state courts.

The Task Force for Teacher Educa-tion and Licensing made formal recom-mendations to the state superintendenton revisions in teacher certification, butno changes have been implemented.New certification regulations are ex-pected to be adopted within three or fouryears.


There is no state plan for profes-sional development in Wisconsin. Thestate has investigated the improvementof teacher skills in technology andperformance-based student assessment.The state is also considering developinga professional development plan closelylinked to the state's 1996-97 EducationImprovement Agenda. The state Advi-sory Council for Teacher Education andCertification advises the SEA on licens-ing and program approval.

Teacher Certification Policies. Theinitial certificate must be renewed everyfive years by earning six credits eitherfrom a university, from an approvedprofessional field experience, or throughequivalent professional education. TheSEA requires 180 clock hours ofprofessional activities in areas related tothe area of licensure or to a professionalcompetency. There are no specialrequirements of first-year teachers.

The state is moving toward aperformance-based system of teacherlicensure and certification. By 2000, thestate intends to have in place outcomestandards and assessments for teacherpreparation. The 1995 report of the TaskForce on Teacher Education and Licen-sure recommended ten standards cover-ing content knowledge and professionalknowledge and skills. The Task Forcealso made recommendations on career-

'Thisprofile is a product of a 50-state study of teacher professional development conducted by the Consortium for Poliy Research in Education. The study andresulting publications were supported by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Additional support has been provided by the National Instituteon Educational Governance, Finance, Polig-Making and Management, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.This profile was reviewed by the state education agency in the summer and fall of 1996. Any errors of fact or opinions expressed in thispublication are solely

those of the authors. <

196

long professional development for edu-cators: moving from the current one-tiered system to one with several levelsof licenses, including beginning teacher,professional teacher, and master teacher.Recognition of National Board Certifica-tion has also been part of this discus-sion. No action has been taken on therecommendations to date.

Wisconsin is a member of theInterstate New Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium.

State-Supported Programs. Mostprofessional development is plannedand delivered locally. When resourcesare available, however, the SEA providesstaff development. The SEA envisionshaving a larger role in professionaldevelopment policy when new certifica-tion and recertification rules are imple-mented.

The state operates a network ofCooperative Educational Service Agen-cies (CESAs) that provide professionaldevelopment services to districts. The12 CESAs are supported primarily bylocal districts that pay to join a CESA.Many CESA programs are fee-based andsome, when supported by federal dol-lars, are free of charge. CESAs areneither funded nor evaluated by theSEA, although they do have a workingrelationship with the state. The CESAsare developing a needs assessmentrubric to help coordinate staff develop-ment services for schools and districts.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. FY 1995 was the first yearWisconsin received Goals 2000 funding,which was distributed to districts assubgrants for local school improvementefforts, including professional develop-ment. Goals 2000 funds also supportedsix professional development schools inthe state.


State Funds. There is no line item inthe state budget dedicated to profes-sional development. The SEA, whenresources are available, provides techni-cal assistance or staff development todistricts. These activities are oftensupported by federal grants as well. The

2

state may provide some funding forprofessional development to supportnew initiatives, but currently no profes-sional development funds are availablefrom the SEA.

Federal Funds. Goals 2000 fundingin 1995 was used in part to supportprofessional development activities inschools. In FY 1995, the state received$4,577,230 in Eisenhower funding.

Local Funds. School districts arenot mandated to set aside a certainpercentage of their budgets for profes-sional development. Local and federalfunds are thought to be the largestsources of funding for professionaldevelopment.


One of the 20 educational improve-ment standards set by the SEA requiresdistricts to prepare a staff developmentplan. The plans are not currentlymonitored by the state. Goals 2000requires districts to have professionaldevelopment plans to qualify for funds.Districts are expected to establishprofessional development committeesand to seek teacher input for theirprofessional development plans.

There is no mandated minimumnumber of days for professional devel-opment. The Wisconsin school yearcalendar includes 180 instructional days;any days beyond that requirement maybe used for professional development.Additional days are negotiated forlocally and vary by district.

The primary providers of profes-sional development at the local level are:district staff, private consultants, CESAs,the Wisconsin Education AssociationCouncil, and universities.


Professional development is negoti-ated at the local level in Wisconsin.Professional development language isnot a mandated bargaining topic in localcontracts, but many contain suchlanguage.

Most teachers receive salary incre-ments based on course credits orcontinuing education units. Policies onsuch salary increments and reimburse-ments for college coursework, travel andconference registration expenses varyfrom district to district


The Wisconsin Education Associa-tion Council (WEAC) is a significantprovider of professional development,offering an annual two-day conferencefor members, as well as workshops onvarious topics throughout the year.WEAC performs research and dissemi-nates articles on best practice throughits newsletter. WEAC is working withsubject-matter organizations and hasprovided scholarships for its members toparticipate in these organizations' con-ferences. WEAC is training a cadre of itsmembers to become adept in certainareas so they can provide professionaldevelopment and support. WEAC issponsoring 100 teachers to participate ina week-long training session in perfor-mance assessment.

WEAC funds the WEAC Profes-sional Development Academy, whichwas created in 1992 in response tomembership concern about obtaininghigh-quality, ongoing professional de-velopment. The Academy is working onthree different projects: development ofa database of quality facilitators, pre-senters, and educators to work withschools and districts; development of acertification program for educationalsupport personnel, which is beingdeveloped with the University of Wis-consin and the Wisconsin Associationof School Administrators; and a collabo-rative effort with these groups and theSEA to develop a professional develop-ment certificate and a master teachercertificate. The purpose of the profes-sional development certificate would beto help educators develop individualplans that might consist of on-the-jobactivities, action research, coursework,discussion groups, or any activity thathelp them to reach state goals. Theprofessional development certificate

could be sought on an individual orgroup basis. For example, a school mightapply for a professional developmentcertificate when a group of teachersoutlines a group plan for meeting thegoal of developing student assess-ments. Certain criteria and standardswould have to be met in all plans, andthose seeking the certificate would berequired to work with an advisor, such asa university staff member. It is thoughtthat teachers would apply for thecertificate to gain recognition andlicense renewal credits. WEAC has notbargained for recognition of the certifi-cate, but has been collaborating with theSEA to link college credit equivalency tothe certificate. The master teachercertificate would focus on the attainmentof high-level skills in classroom tech-nique and leadership. WEAC wants tomake the master teacher certificatecomparable with National Board Certifi-cation.

Subject-matter organizations offerprofessional development opportuni-ties. One interview respondent said,"There is an organization for everydiscipline, and they all do professionaldevelopment. There are hundreds ofthem." The Wisconsin chapter of theAssociation of Supervisors for Curricu-lum Development and the state chapterof the National Staff DevelopmentCouncil also provide professional devel-opment to educators.

Higher education institutions aremajor providers of professional develop-ment. In addition to course offeringsleading to the renewal of teacherlicenses, many colleges and universitiesmaintain partnerships with local schooldistricts to provide professional devel-opment. Higher education institutionsare involved in many WEAC activitiesand work with the state on the TeacherEducation and Certification Task Force.The University of Wisconsin at Parksideoffers direct staff development servicesthrough a local teacher center that isfunded partially by the University andpartially by local districts. Many otherinstitutions of higher education in thestate maintain close working relation-ships with the neighboring districts.

The CRAY Foundation has estab-lished corporate partnerships with localdistricts, providing technical supportand teacher training in math and science.


Peter BurkeDirectorDivision of Learning Support andInstructional ServicesP.O. Box 7841Madison, WI 53707-7841608-266-0986

Katherine LindConsultantWisconsin Department of PublicInstruction125 Webster StreetMadison, WI 53707608-266-1788

Katie StoutDirectorDivision for Instruction and Profes-sional DevelopmentWisconsin Education AssociationCouncilP.O. Box 800333 Nob Hill DriveMadison, WI 53708608-276-7711, x215






1963

Teacher Professional Development Profile

WyomingEducation Policy Context

yoming's public educationpolicies reflect a system ofstrong local control, resulting

in wide variability in the areas of schoolfinancing, curricula programming, andstudent assessment across the state's 49rural district sites.

In 1990, Wyoming's General Assem-bly passed Enrolled Act 50, calling forthe State Board of Education (SBE) toestablish statewide goals for publiceducation. The Wyoming Department ofEducation (referred to hereafter as thestate education agency, or SEA) wascharged with developing a core curricu-lum. The SEA collected curriculummaterials from every district and con-tracted the Mid-continent RegionalLaboratory (McREL) to develop corecurriculum standards. Statewide com-mittees in each of the core curriculumareas reviewed McREL's work, identifiedmodel exit standards, and made finalrecommendations to the SBE.

In June of 1995, the SBE adoptedcore curriculum standards and achieve-ment goals for science, mathematics, finearts, applied technology, and languagearts. Statewide committees (with theassistance of McREL) are presentlydeveloping an accountability systembased on the core curriculum goals. Thenew accountability system is expected totake effect in the 1996-97 school year.



Enrolled Act 50 required localdistricts and their communities to estab-lish performance standards for studentlearning. A new school accreditationprocess that measures schools' progressis being phased in and will be fullyoperational by the 1996-97 school year.Enrolled Act 50 also mandates districtsto issue an annual report card to thecommunity and the SBE. The reportcards, first issued in September of 1992,contain the district's annual high schooldropout rate, averages of studentassessment results, the number ofclassroom instruction hours by gradelevel, the number of parent and commu-nity participants and programs, thenumber of parental visits, the number ofstudents involved in extra-curricularactivities, an itemization of schoolbudget expenditures (by percent), thedistrict's goals, and a description of thedistrict's school improvement efforts.

Throughout much of this process,Wyoming's school finance system hasbeen the target of a lawsuit initiated inJuly of 1992 by four of the state's largestschools districts (Campbell 1, Sweetwater1 and 2, and Uinta 1), which were laterjoined by the Wyoming EducationAssociation. The suit focuses on schoolequity and charges that the currentsystem is unconstitutional. In Novem-ber of 1995, the Wyoming Supreme Courtordered the legislature to identify byJuly of 1997 the components of a

"quality education" and provide fundsto ensure that all districts achieve thatstandard. The ruling exceeds the schoolfinance issue by reinforcing the state'srole in determining and assuming leader-ship over the elements of publiceducation. The SEA and SBE issued ajoint press release in response to thecourt's ruling, indicating that EnrolledAct 50 activities will remain in effect andbe used by the legislature in their effortsto "craft a quality education program forWyoming schools."


Wyoming's SEA and SBE are in theprocess of drafting Strategic Plan 2000,an education improvement plan thatidentifies staff development as one of sixpriority areas. The plan proposes tocreate a statewide staff developmentplan that would provide financial incen-tives for district- and school-basedprofessional development activities andinclude a state monitoring system toevaluate the quality of local programs.Timelines for the development andimplementation of the objectives asoutlined in the strategic plan are yet to beestablished.

Teacher Certification Policies. TheWyoming Professional Teaching Stan-dards Board (PTSB) is a statutory,autonomous entity created by the


legislature in 1992. The PTSB hasauthority over licensing teachers andestablishing certification rules and regu-lations. The PTSB also approves localstaff development programs for continu-ing education unit (CEU) credit. The 13-member PTSB consists of six classroomteachers, two school principals, oneauxiliary staff representative, one centraloffice administrator, one local schoolboard member, and two representativesfrom higher education institutions.

Upon completion of all preservicerequirements, Wyoming teachers areissued a standard certificate that isrenewable every five years with thecompletion of five semester hours ofcollege coursework or CEU credit. CEUcredits may be earned by participating inPTSB-approved, in-service activitiesoffered by local districts and otherproviders. Teachers who achieveNational Board Certification are consid-ered to have met their renewal require-ment for one five-year cycle. There is nospecial program offered for beginningteachers.

State-Supported Programs. TheSEA does not have an office to overseestate-sponsored professional develop-ment activities. Most of the trainingactivities conducted in the state arelinked to categorical programs (e.g.,special education and Title I). Onestatewide training effort for all schoolpersonnel is provided by the SchoolAccreditation Office, which is conduct-ing statewide training on the new schoolaccreditation process. In addition, theSEA is currently training staff fromdistricts that were not included in theaccreditation training held during the1995-96 school year. This cadre oftrainers will be used as accreditationmonitors for on-site accreditation teamsin 1996-97 and 1997-98.

Federal- or Foundation-SupportedPrograms. Wyoming uses a number offederal and foundation resources tosupport staff development activities atthe local level. Sources include Ei-senhower grants and the NationalDiffusion Network, as well as Title I andChapter 2 funds.

2


State Funds. The Wyoming legisla-ture does not appropriate funds specifi-cally for professional development at thestate or local level. Consequently, fund-ing support for in-service activities isdependent on federal sources anddistricts' discretionary use of generalfunds.

Federal Funds. Wyoming receiveda $1.2-million Eisenhower ProfessionalDevelopment Grant for the 1995-96school year.

Local Funds. Local budget set-asides for professional development arenot required. Expenditures in this regardvary considerably among districts.


Wyoming's school accreditationprocess requires each school and districtto have a staff development plan that isbased on district and school studentperformance goals. Staff developmentactivities must be based on needs asidentified through student assessments;specifically, staff development mustfocus on subject-matter areas in whichstudent performance is poor.

The 180-day school year calendarincludes five non-instructional days thatmay be used for staff development and/or housekeeping activities. Districtsalso have the option of using analternative school day schedule to createmore time or days for in-service activi-ties. One SEA official estimated thatonly a handful of districts (six or seven)utilize this option.

Districts acquire much of their in-service activities by contracting without-of-state experts and staff fromregional labs. Districts also contractprofessional development services fromother districts. The SEA and institutionsof higher education are not consideredto be a primary source of professionaldevelopment at the local level.

200


Teacher compensation policies forprofessional development are deter-mined through local collective bargain-ing agreements. There is a great deal ofvariability among districts in this regard.The state salary schedule awards stepincreases based on a teacher's numberof years in service. Professional growthactivities, such as advanced degrees orthe accumulation of graduate credits, arenot merited on the salary schedule.


The University of Wyoming (UW) isthe only four-year postsecondary insti-tution in the state. The WyomingSchool-University Partnership promotescollaborative programming betweenschool and university staff in the areasof teacher education, instructional tech-nology, staff development, and schoolrestructuring. The Partnership wascreated in 1987 to restructure the teacherpreparation program to provide itsstudents with an in-depth, school-basedtraining experience beginning in theirsecond year. In 1994, a Staff Develop-ment Task Force was created to providea clearinghouse on research, resources,and best practices in staff development;to identify and support networkingopportunities; to enhance the awarenesslevel of staff development events; tofacilitate critical conversations on staffdevelopment issues; and to advocate foreffective staff development. The TaskForce members include UW faculty anddeans, the PTSB director, an SEAofficial, and superintendents represent-ing the 16 partnership districts. AnEisenhower grant (totaling $27,000 forthe 1995-96 year) has provided fundingfor the Task Force to establish a StaffDevelopment Academy and conduct adistrict-level, in-service needs assess-ment.

The A-Trac Center for TeacherDevelopment, developed by the NatronaCounty School District, is utilized as amajor professional development pro-vider at the state and local levels. Since1991, A-Trac staff have provided train-ing activities in response to districtrequests and state reforms; it alsopublishes a bimonthly Learning Ser-vices newsletter that lists upcomingprofessional development activitiesthroughout the state. A-Trac has beeninstrumental in promoting the use ofwriting assessment at the district level.Records indicate that every district in thestate has utilized its services and that theSEA has contracted with them as well.Each year, A-Trac sponsors a three-day,statewide conference on teaching peda-gogy. Funding for A-Trac activities issecured through Chapter 2 funds for twofull-time staff and fees charged to otherdistricts for services provided.


Linda StowersDirectorProfessional Teaching Standards BoardHathaway Building, 2nd Floor2300 Capitol AvenueCheyenne, WY 82002307-777-7291

Jan SheinkerDirectorSchool Accreditation UnitWyoming Department of EducationHathaway Building, 2nd Floor2300 Capitol AvenueCheyenne, WY 82002307-777-6808

Peter EllsworthCoordinatorStaff Development Task ForceWyoming School-University Partner-shipP.O. Box 3992Laramie, WY 82071307-766-6671


for 1993.





2f,1 3

(9/92)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

ERIC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Releaseform (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").

Date post:	01-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

PA. 201p. - ERICmust become active members of these communities, committed to the search for more...

Documents