Teacher Professional Development (PD)

DATA on PD

• Traditional professional development leads to about 10% implementation rate.

• Impact on changes in instructional practice range from (0.17) to (0.92) when coaching included w/PD.

• Impact on change in student achievement range from  (0.03) to (0.37) when coaching included w/PD.

• Teachers do better developing baseline skills (content knowledge) in PD sessions.

• PD delivery via video and remote web based were less effective but not by much.

• The amount of time in PD (high dosage) is less important than the quality and narrow focus of PD.

• A change in teacher practices is quicker to accomplish than changes in student achievement.

• Changes in student achievement require more sustained, intensive, and focused interventions and coaching.

• When PD and coaching focused on more generalized topics the effect-size (0.07) was much lower than content specific topics (0.52). Marzano & Simms (2013)

BENEFITS

• Multiple studies and reviews show that substantial, high-quality PD can raise student achievement by roughly 20–21 percentile points when programs are well designed and implemented.

• PD deepens content knowledge and pedagogical skill, leading to more effective explanations, better scaffolding, and richer questioning in classrooms.

• Teachers report using a wider repertoire of evidence-based strategies and are more likely to align instruction with curriculum, standards, and assessments after targeted PD.

• Ongoing PD helps teachers identify and close skills gaps, gain new certifications, and access leadership pathways, strengthening career progression and professional identity.

• Participation in peer-based PD (coaching, collaboration, joint assessment) builds self-awareness, reflective habits, and clearer understanding of strengths and areas for growth.

• Engaging PD increases teacher confidence and sense of efficacy by providing concrete tools that work with real students, which can reduce burnout risk.

• When teachers feel supported to keep learning, job satisfaction and commitment to the profession rise, which is linked to better retention.

• PD that involves teams promotes collaboration, common language about instruction, and shared expectations for student learning across a school.

• Students benefit from a more coherent experience—consistent strategies, clearer routines, and instruction that reflects current research and technologies.  link

HOW TO

• Content focused –  PD targets specific subject matter and the pedagogies needed to teach that content (e.g., disciplinary literacy, fractions, inquiry in science), closely tied to the actual curriculum teachers use. This grounding in real content and materials increases transfer to day-to-day instruction and student tasks.

• Active learning – Teachers learn through modeling, rehearsal, lesson design, analysis of student work, and trying strategies—not just listening to lectures. Active engagement allows teachers to connect new ideas to their own classrooms and supports adult learning principles.

• Collaboration- Effective PD creates structured opportunities for teachers to work together—lesson study, PLCs, peer observation, and joint analysis of student data and work. Collaboration builds collective efficacy, shared language for instruction, and coherence across classrooms and grade levels.

• Models of effective practice – Teachers see clear, concrete examples through live demonstrations, classroom videos, sample units, and annotated student work. These models make abstract principles visible and reduce ambiguity about what high-quality implementation looks like.

• Coaching and expert support – Ongoing support from instructional coaches, mentors, or content experts helps teachers implement new practices, troubleshoot, and refine over time. Job-embedded coaching (in classrooms, with real students) is especially associated with stronger changes in practice.

• Feedback and reflection – Teachers receive focused feedback (from coaches, peers, or data) and engage in structured reflection on their practice and student learning. Tools like video analysis, lesson study debriefs, and examination of student work support continuous refinement rather than one-off change.

• Sustained duration – Effective PD is ongoing: multiple sessions over months or years, with time built in for practice, classroom implementation, and follow-up. Short, isolated workshops without sustained support rarely produce meaningful or lasting changes in teaching or achievement.

• Job-embedded and classroom-centered – PD is tightly connected to teachers’ own students, lessons, and data, often occurring in or around the classroom rather than separate from it. Examples include lesson study, peer observation, action research, and collaborative unit planning anchored in current standards and assessments.

• Relevant, purposeful, and needs-based –Content is aligned to school/district goals, local curricula, and specific student needs, and is informed by data and teacher input. When PD addresses clearly defined problems of practice and has explicit success criteria, teachers are more likely to invest and implement. link

CHALLENGES

• Limited buy-in when PD feels mandated, irrelevant, or disconnected from teachers’ real problems of practice, leading to passive participation and minimal transfer.

• Personal barriers such as overload, weak work–life balance, and reduced motivation make it hard for teachers to invest time and cognitive energy in sustained learning.

• One-size-fits-all workshops that ignore subject, grade level, or experience differences reduce relevance and diminish impact on classroom instruction.

• Lack of follow-up, coaching, and feedback means even strong ideas from PD sessions fade quickly and do not become embedded practice.

• Time constraints during the school day, scheduling conflicts, and limited release time make it difficult to provide sustained, job-embedded PD.

• Inadequate funding, materials, and staffing (e.g., few coaches or facilitators) weaken implementation quality and exacerbate inequities between schools.

• Weak or fragmented school vision for teaching and learning leads to PD that is disconnected from core instructional priorities.

• Low collaboration, mistrust, or “sit-and-get” cultures undermine risk-taking, peer learning, and the continuous experimentation required for PD to take hold.

• Misalignment between PD, curriculum, assessments, and evaluation frameworks creates mixed messages and initiative overload for teachers.

• Top-down mandates that do not cultivate teacher ownership or voice can reduce PD to compliance activities rather than authentic professional learning.link

WHAT NOT TO DO

• Run one-off, “drive-by” workshops with no follow-up, coaching, or classroom connection; these rarely change practice.

• Offer generic, one-size-fits-all sessions that ignore grade level, content area, and teacher experience, leaving veterans bored and novices overwhelmed.

• Choose topics based on mandates or trends rather than actual instructional priorities or teacher-identified problems of practice.

• Treat teachers as passive recipients—talking at them, reading slides, or scripting participation—instead of engaging them as professionals with voice and choice.

• Use PLC or PD time for announcements and logistics so instructional learning becomes secondary or disappears.

• Introduce new initiatives rapidly without time to practice, get feedback, or monitor impact, creating “initiative fatigue” and cynicism.

• Schedule PD at times that guarantee low energy and minimal engagement (e.g., long, sit-and-get days with no breaks or active learning).

• Fail to prepare facilitators, materials, or exemplars, resulting in disorganized sessions that model the opposite of good instruction.

• Keep funding the same PD year after year without checking whether it improves teaching or student outcomes.

• Ignore data from classrooms (observations, student work, assessments) and teacher feedback when refining or discontinuing PD offerings. link