Professional Development

The purpose of professional development is to improve teacher efficacy by providing teachers with new skills. Sion (2001, p. 24) states that “there is no greater evidence of a talented and confident English teacher than one who has command of subject matter and is willing and able to clarify the material for students at all levels.” Teachers should be masters of their subject area and equipped to help students gain mastery of the subject as well.  Hammond, Chung, and Frelow (2002, p. 286) concluded that “the extent to which teachers felt well prepared when they entered teaching  significantly correlated with their sense of teaching efficacy, their sense of responsibility for student learning, and their plans to remain in teaching.”

Individual capacity, similar to self-efficacy,  is defined as the level of ability one can reach. Professional development is meant to maximize individual capacity.  As individual capacity increases, collective capacity, the level of ability of the whole school, is expected to increase. A successful professional development program should increase the ability of the individual by providing opportunities to improve needed skills and increase the ability of the whole as they work together as a unit. “For teachers in schools with high levels of collective capacity, reflecting on their practice is an ongoing, regular and valued part of their daily routine” (Fullen, 2007, p10.).  Schools must build a culture where teachers work together to plan, discuss, and evaluate teaching to increase efficacy.  Fullen (2007, p. 12) also defined building capacity as, “actions that lead to an increase in the collective power of a group to improve student achievement, especially by raising the bar and closing the gap for all students.”  Increasing individual and collective capacity should have the additional benefit of improving student learning and achievement.

Also, “American education continues to prize teacher autonomy above the notion of teaching as a collaborative enterprise, in contrast to practices in higher-performing countries” (Sawchuck, 2010, p. 3).  In a Learning Forward commissioned study, it was found that teachers in Asian and European countries “spent fewer minutes instructing students and more time working on their lessons with other teachers” than teachers in the United States (Sawchuck, 2010, p. 3). Time spent on lesson planning in the United States averages three to five hours a week while teachers in European and Asian countries spend 15 to 20 hours a week on similar planning is done in collaboration with their peers (Sawchuck, 2010). Teacher isolation is a professional norm in the United States. Isolation is a barrier to becoming a learning community.

Professional Development in Christian Schools

A recent ACSI-commissioned study surveyed ACSI schools for professional development preferences and experience. Importantly, the study showed that Christian school heads, principals, and teacher leaders feel inadequately prepared to lead educational leadership (Swaner & Reel, 2016). These leaders also experienced a discrepancy between their stated priorities and their genuine efforts when it comes to leading professional development in their schools. In the survey, leaders stated that educational leadership is a priority (79%) and they want to undertake their professional development on how to lead professional learning in the school (47%)  (Swaner & Reel, 2016).  This finding corroborates literature findings that show that educational leaders lack skills and confidence in educational leadership. Research confirms that school leadership has a significant impact on teacher satisfaction and efficacy as well as student achievement (Barlow, 2014; Elpers &Westhuis, 2008).  When Christian school leaders are not equipped to lead instructional development and do not make it a top priority, there is a roadblock to improvement. These leaders will need to engage in professional development that addresses explicitly their capacity to lead instructional leadership.

Finding the best return on investment for (ROI) professional development has been at the heart of educational research for decades. Findings indicate that practice-based, collaborative professional development with a mentorship program is the most effective.  Many public school districts have implemented these programs as part of education reform.  Historically, Christian education leaders lag significantly behind the public sector in embracing education reforms and sometimes reject them outright. As stated in Swaner (2016, p. 32) Montoro “found that professional development in a sample of Christian schools did not meet national standards, and that progress is needed in providing more active, collaborative, and content-specific professional development.”

 Christian schools need cost-effective professional development with high returns. The past ten years of post-recession have seen shrinking enrollments in private schools. “The percentage of all elementary and secondary students enrolled in private schools decreased from 12 percent in 1995–96 to 10 percent in 2013–14, and is projected to continue to decrease to 9 percent in 2025–26 (the last year for which projected data are available)” (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2016). Lower enrollment translates into less income with tighter budgets, less staffing, and more responsibility for faculty. These are conditions affiliated with low satisfaction. Tighter budgets and reduced staffing usually results in a reduction in time and investment in professional development. In actuality, the most successful companies increase professional development during periods of crisis to help employees deal efficiently with the challenges of a changed environment.

Lack of prior teacher training presents a significant challenge when considering professional development in Christian Schools.  Christian schools often do not require state licensure or even ACSI certification for employment.  In one of the few studies on teacher training trends of teachers in ACSI schools, 30.5% of Christian school teachers responded that they held a non-education or unknown undergraduate degree (Finn, Swezey, & Warren, 2010).    These teachers often enter service without specific training in curriculum and development, differentiated learning, classroom managements, growth and development of humans, or learning theories. Christian school leaders must ensure that they are providing professional development that will help these teachers garner the skills necessary to be effective teachers.  Administrators need to make sure that these teachers are receiving some ongoing development each year, especially in the early years, to increase their efficacy.  A delay in implementation may result in higher teacher turnover (Nir and Bogler, 2006).

The most recent ACSI survey on professional development in Christian schools shows that 78% of teachers’ desire to have content specific professional development (Swaner & Reel, 2016) up from previous studies (Headley, 2003). This “shift occurred with their counterparts in secular settings a decade or so earlier” (Swaner & Reel, 2016, p. 29). The latent emphasis on content driven professional development is another indicator that Christian schools lag behind other reform movements in education. Christian educators realize their need to be more effective in the classroom. Competition from charter schools along with parental demand for high return on their investment requires that schools provide increasingly rigorous classroom experiences. 

Surprisingly, professional development content area for Christian school teachers is biblical integration.  Sixty-five percent of Christian school teachers surveyed stated they need professional development in this area (Swaner & Reel, 2016). Integration of Christian faith with academics rated as the 4th greatest need for additional preparation out of 25 identified needs in Finn et al.’s (2010) survey. The stated need for biblical integration training is evidence that teachers are feeling ill-equipped to handle the core component of Christian education, Biblical integration. Leaders must consider this a priority in professional development. The Christian school faces a dim future if both biblical and academic practices do not meet the level of constituent expectations.

Part 4/5 Coming Soon – Professional Learning Communities Background

Part 5/5 Coming Soon – Cost of PD and PLCs and Call to Action