Over the past few decades our understanding of how people learn—and how to design environments and experiences that maximize that learning—has been transformed. This new understanding has had significant implications for learning in many parts of the globe. Teachers, administrators and education officials have recalibrated beliefs, attitudes and practices to accommodate student learning.

In many (though far from all) parts of the globe, pre-service teaching programs stress learner-centered methodologies. Ministries of Education have modified instruction, curricula and assessments to address the various learning styles of their nation’s students. Teachers have refashioned themselves from micromanagers to facilitators of student learning, guiding students toward higher-order thinking. The pervasive global professional sentiment is one of sensitivity and accommodation toward all students’ intellectual, affective and developmental needs. This may not be fully realized in practice, but it is at least an ethos. It may not be universal, but it is prevalent. Even in the poorest countries, ministries of education “talk the talk” that learning must be “student” or “child” centered, even if they do not yet “walk the walk.”

Teachers are learners, too

In contrast to students, this recognition of how students learn and the accommodations necessary to facilitate such learning have not been extended to teachers’ learning. In contrast to learning opportunities for students that are student centered, learning opportunities for teachers largely remain remarkably non–“teacher-centered”—everywhere in the world—embodying, not best practices in adult learning or professional development, but expedient practices, and in many cases, malpractice, as I’ve noted (sine fine) here, here and here.

This lack of awareness that teachers, like their students, are also learners, to me, represents the greatest impediment to improved professional development for teachers, especially in the world’s poorest countries. Mindsets inform program design and resource allocation, and from what I see, we do not see teachers, as we do students, as learners—and in the world’s poorest and most fragile places, we really do not see teachers as learners.  However, if we want to improve professional development for teachers everywhere, adopting a new psychology is imperative. We must begin to recognize that teachers, like their students, are learners who need the same high-quality instruction that we advocate for students and provide teachers with learning opportunities that are teacher-centered.

Teacher-centered professional development

Teacher-centered professional development (TCPD) is the natural complement to student-centered instruction, grounded in research on effective professional development and adult learning. (I have written about this in the past, but hope readers will add, modify or dispute what I’ve written). Below are some of the characteristics of teacher-centered professional development:

1. TCPD recognizes that teachers, like their students, are unique in how they learn, thus it aims to provide teachers with the same high-quality learning that students receive

Teacher learning, like student learning, “works” when it focuses on the needs of teachers as learners, when it is connected to teacher work, when it is coherent—ongoing with time for planning, practice, and revision—when it includes scaffolding and support by a trained support person; and when it is differentiated and active (Garet, et al. 2001).                                                                           

Teacher-centered professional development offers teachers a range of professional development options (workshops, classroom observation and feedback, study groups, and in-class assistance); formats (online courses, collaborative time with colleagues, workshops); activities (hands-on activities, readings, lesson planning, discussions, etc.); providers (a content area specialist, another colleague, a group of colleagues); and groupings (large-group, small group, individual and self-directed teacher learning) so that as much as possible, opportunities for teacher learning are differentiated according to teachers’ needs, learning styles and professional and personal responsibilities.

2. TCPD recognizes that instruction for teachers, as for students, must begin with where the teacher is and targets interventions to meet this reality

Years ago, colleagues at SEDL and I embarked upon a professional development program to help teachers integrate computers to support student-centered learning. District officials emphasized a skills-training approach—the rationale being that technology proficiency would lead to greater classroom use of technology. This approach had been tried unsuccessfully previously, and because of very low implementation rates, teachers were dismissed as “resistant.” We were asked to “build a better training.”

Interviews with teachers revealed that they did indeed balk at using technology—but because they only had 1-4 computers for the 30 students in their classrooms. Previous PD had never focused on classroom management and teachers were concerned that grouping students and the absence of a perfect student-to-computer ratio would result in classroom chaos.  Their “resistance” came from a good place—they were afraid that technology would actually compromise student learning—but no one had ever asked. As a result of these conversations, we focused every session of the first year’s professional development on managing the limited computer classroom and on helping teachers understand, not how to use technology, but rather how to design and manage different instructional practices. By the end of this first year, classroom technology use tripled. The district’s overall goal had been attained because we started with teachers concerns rather than dismissing them (Burns & Dimock, 2007).

3. TCPD recognizes that teachers, like their students, need ongoing support to implement and internalize what they have learned

The most successful professional development programs support teachers so they can transfer learning “from the training from to the classroom.” In Indonesia, where as part of an EDC project several years ago, we provided teachers with ongoing coaching, 98% of teachers implemented at least one one-computer activity. For teachers in a Southern Indian state who received ongoing support (as part of an EDC math and science professional development program), their implementation rates and changes in beliefs were far higher than for colleagues in another state where teachers received more episodic support.

4. TCPD recognizes that teacher learning, like student learning, must move teachers along a continuum of higher-level thinking

A few years ago, as an instructional coach, I lead a teacher study group focused on improving student writing. Over time, as we interacted with the writing process, teachers’ understanding of the writing process deepened, moving from a simple belief that writing is something assigned and grounded in mechanics and grammar to awareness that writing must be nurtured and that good writing often involves hard-to-teach skills like voice and flow. In writing themselves, many teachers discovered that they, like their students, did not like to write, nor were they particularly good at it. This reflection on writing, grounded in teachers’ becoming writers themselves, resulted in greater empathy for struggling student writers; greater understanding of the complexities involved in writing well; and subsequent re-evaluation and revision of many writing assignments.

5. TCPD recognizes that teachers, like their students, learn best as part of a community

The most powerful learning opportunities occur when teachers form communities in which they collaborate, share knowledge and support one another in the implementation of new learning. A teacher-centered professional development approach combines sufficient  time,  a collaborative structure and the impetus needed to help teachers move through stages of community development—from communities of interest where teachers first  connect to one another via a shared professional interest to communities of learning where teachers discuss instructional practices or analyze work to the final stage of a community of practice in which teachers plan together, teach together and work together (Burns & Dimock, 2007; Burns, 2011: 192-193).

Conclusion

We are well aware of the structures and strategies that best support student learning. We need to harness the same will and commitment to apply the same (known) structures and strategies to support teacher learning. The concept of “teacher-centered professional development” is a first pass at developing a shared conceptual framework around which donors and international education providers can coalesce. Such a framework is also an implicit admonition that high-quality teacher professional development is time-, labor- and resource intensive—a reality that may propel decision makers to maintain the professional development status quo in favor of cost savings. But the leakage wrought by  not doing professional development right—the wasted time, money and effort, and the belief by many teachers and policymakers that PD offers little relevance and utility—may be a far more costly decision.

References

Burns, M. (2012). Technology, teaching and learning: Research, experience and global lessons learned. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ldfqsya or http://www.mehe.gov.lb/Uploads/file/TTLA.pdf

Burns, M. (2011). Distance education for teacher training: Modes, models and methods. Retrieved from http://go.edc.org/07xd

Burns, M. & Dimock, K.V. (2007). Technology as a catalyst for school community: Beyond boxes and bandwidth. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Press.

Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Beirman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38 (4), 915-945.