Dr. Teresa A. Hughes, Dissertation, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair
Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Proposal Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation...
description
Transcript of Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Proposal Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation...
April 2007
The Differences in Professional Development Training Between
Private Corporations and Public Education
A Proposal DefenseBy
Yolanda E. SmithWilliam Allan Kritsonis, PhD
Dissertation Chair
Committee Members
William Allan Kritsonis, Ph.D.(Dissertation Chair)
Ben C. DeSpain, Ed.D(Member)
Douglas Hermond, Ph.D.(Member)
David Herrington, Ph.D.(Member)
Camille Gibson, Ph.D.(Outside Member)
Outline
I. The Problem
II. Purpose of Study
III. Research Questions [5]
IV. Hypotheses (3)
V. Significance of the Study
VI. Review of Literature
VII. Research Design
The Whole Pie of Problems
Retention16%
Shortage16%
P.D17%
Morale17%
Salary17%
Student Achievement17%
The Problem Slice
ProfessionalDevelopment
The Problem
“Until we improve the methods used to measure the links among professional development, teacher performance, and student achievement, educators will be unable to convince parents, community leaders, and local school boards to provide the sufficient time and funding necessary to improve our teachers’ understanding and our students’ performance” (Hackett, 2005).
I. Purpose of the Study
To compare the professional development training programs in the corporate business world with the professional development training programs in the public education systems using Guskey 2000 model.
Research Questions (1)
What are the differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training between educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?
(Quantitative)
Research Question (2)
What are the differences in participants learning in professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?
(Quantitative)
Research Question (3) What are the differences in
organizational support for professional development between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?
(Quantitative)
Research Questions (4) What are the differences in participants’ use of knowledge
and skills gained from their professional development training program provided by private corporations and public education as measured by Guskey’s Model?
(Qualitative)
(Qualitative)
Research Question (5) What are the differences in how the
evaluation of participants’ learning outcomes is determine between private corporation and public education as measured by Guskey’s model?
(Qualitative)
III. Hypotheses
Ho1 There are no statistically significant differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training provided between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool.
Hypotheses
Ho2 There are no statistically significant differences in participants’ learning throughout their professional development training outcomes between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool.
Hypotheses
Ho3 There are no statistically significant differences in organizational support for professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool.
IV. Significance of the Study (1)
Education is a business. Advocates for Human Resource and Educators feel the pressure to prove that the efforts giving to professional development training is making a difference in performance.
Significance of the Study (2)
Knowledge gained from the study will provide educational leaders with information about how the quality of professional development training may eliminate teacher shortages and enhance their performance.
V. Review of Literature
PD Overview/HistoricalPast ResearchVariables InvestigatedGuskey Model
Review of LiteratureOverview/Historical
What is Professional Development?NSDCASTDGuskeyHistory
Review of LiteratureMiller, 2006
Professional
Development in a
Large School
District: An
Application of
Guskey’s Model
Grade one teachers,
mentors and principals Participants’ Reactions, Knowledge and Skills, Organizational Support, Participants’ Use of
knowledge, Impact
Case Study; Quantitative and
Qualitative
Research linking Professional Development with student achievement in
language arts.
Greene, 2005Quality Matters: A Different Perspective on the Relationship Between School Resources and Student Outcomes
303 Public Comprehensive High Schools in New Jersey
Outcome Variables (Language Arts, Math gain scores) Predictor Variables (Environment & Resource)
Quantitative (Correlational)
Research on more efficient and effective allocation strategies
Author's/year/Title Population/Sample Variables Methodology Future Research
Review of LiteratureAuthor's/year/Title Population/Sample Variables Methodology Future
Research
Tsarouhas, 2004
Understanding
organizational context for
the evaluation of training
outcomes: A multi-site case
study in the community
mental health sector
Four organizations in the mental health sector. 22 participants were
interviewed
Guskey 3rd level (Organizational support and change)
Qualitative only
(Interviews) Various sectors beside education should be used by Guskey’s
model.
Lowden, 2003
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Professional Development
Certified K-12 teachers in two districts in New York state.
Participants’ Satisfaction, Participants’ Learning, Organizational Support and Change, Participants’ Knowledge, Student learning, Teachers Attitudes/beliefs
Quantitative (Survey only)
Research on PD based on the New Reform; Replicated on a larger population; Teacher perception of PD & teacher evaluation process
Review of LiteratureVariables
• Participants’ Reactions
• Participants’ Learning
• Organizational Support
• Participants’ Use of Knowledge and Skills
• Students Outcomes
Guskey 2000 Model
EvaluationLevel
What Questions Are Addressed?
How will information be gathered?
What is Measured or Assessed?
How will information be used?
1. Participants’ Reactions Did they like it?Was their time well spent?Did the material make sense?Will it be useful?Was the leader knowledgeable and helpful?Were the refreshments fresh and tasty?Was the room the right temperature?Were the chairs comfortable?
Questionnaires administered at the end of the session.Focus groupsInterviewsPersonal learning logs
Initial satisfaction with the experience
To improve program design and delivery
2. Participants’ Learning Did participants acquire the intended knowledge and skills/
Paper-and-pencil instrumentsSimulations and demonstrationsParticipant reflections (oral and/or written)Participant portfoliosCase study analyses
New knowledge and skills of participants
To improve program content, format, and organization
Guskey 2000 Model
3. Organization support and change
What was the impact on the organization?Did it affect organizational climate and procedures?Was implementation advocated, facilitated, and supported?Was the support public and overt?Were the problems addressed quickly and efficiently?Were sufficient resources made available?Were successes recognized and shared?
District and school recordsMinutes from follow-up meetingsQuestionnairesFocus groupsStructured interviews with participants and school or district administratorsParticipants portfolios
The organization’s advocacy, support, accommodation, facilitation, and recognition.
To document and improve organizational supportTo inform future change efforts
4. Participants’ use of new knowledge and skills
Did participants effectively apply the new knowledge and skills/
QuestionnairesStructured interviews with participants and their supervisorsParticipant reflections (oral and/or written)Participant portfoliosDirect observationsVideo-or audiotapes
Degree and quality of implementationTo document and improve the implementation of program content
EvaluationLevel
What Questions Are Addressed?
How will information be gathered?
What is Measured or Assessed?
How will information be used?
Guskey 2000 ModelEvaluation
LevelWhat Questions Are
Addressed?How will information be
gathered?What is Measured or
Assessed?How will information be
used?
5. Student learning outcomes
What was the impact on students?
Did it affect student performance or achievement?
Did it influence students’ physical or emotional well being?
Are students more confident as leaders?
Is student attendance improving? Are dropout
decreasing?
Student records
School records Questionnaires
Structured interviews
with students, parents,
teachers, and/or
administrators•
Participant portfolios
Student learning outcomes:
-Cognitive (performance and achievement)
-Affective (attitudes and dispositions)
-Affective (attitudes and dispositions)
Psychomotor (skills and
behaviors)
To focus and improve all aspects of program design, implementation, and follow-up
To demonstrate the overall impact of
professional development
How to Use Guskey’s Model
****Work the model backwards****
Level 5
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
VI. Research Design Research Method: Mixed- Methods using an explanatory design.
Quantitative The quantitative data will be collected first on Participants’ Reaction,
Participants’ Learning, Organizational Support, & Participants’ Use of Knowledge and Skills using the PDAT web-based survey/questionnaire tool.
http://pdat.speedsurvey.com
Qualitative The qualitative data will be collected in two parts; Questionnaires and
interviews in order to identify the over all quality and effectiveness of professional development provided to employees.
InstrumentationPilot Study
Convenience Sampling
30 NASA employees
30 Educators within HISD Test-Retest
Reliability
Trust-worthiness (Fair-Clear-Free of
Bias)
Changes based on inputsParticipants Excluded
Subjects of the Study
Sampling Method Purposive Sampling first, for selection
of School District and Private Corporation.
Cluster Random Sampling second, for selecting the schools and departments.
Cluster Sampling
HS,MS,ES,HS,MS,ES,OSAdmin Bldg
HS, ES, MS,HS,MS,ESHS,ES,MS,HS,MS,ESHS,MS,ES,HS,MS,ES
HS,MS,ES,HS,MS,ES, OS,Admin Bldg, Admin Bldg
Admin Bldg
Analysis of Data
• QuantitativeResearch Questions Hypothesis Independent
VariablesDependentVariables
Statistics
What are the differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development
Assessment Tool?
Ho1 There are no
statistically significant difference in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment
Tool?
Two Groups:
Public Educators
Corporate Employees
Participants’ Reactions
T-test for independent variables
Weighted Means1 = SD2 = D3 = NA4 = A5 = SA
What are the differences in participants’ learning in professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?
Ho2 There are no
statistically significant differences in participants’ learning in professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?.
Two Groups:
Public Educators
Corporate Employees
Participants’ Learning
T-test for independent variablesWeighted Means1 = SD2 = D3 = NA4 = A5 = SA
Analysis of Data
• Quantitative
Research Questions Hypothesis IndependentVariables
DependentVariables
Statistics
What are the differences in organizational support regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development
Assessment Tool?
Ho1 There are no
statistically significant difference in organizational support regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment
Tool?
Two Groups:
Public Educators
Corporate Employees
Organizational Support
T-test for independent variables
Weighted Means1 = SD2 = D3 = NA4 = A5 = SA
Analysis of Data
Qualitative
Surveys/Questionnaire & Interviews
Record all I hear
Coding UsingNVivo
Software
Use Frequency TablePercentages will be
Calculated and ListedIn Descending order
Analysis of DataQuantitative
TEA/Districts/School Data/Companies HR Data base/Fill in the blanks surveys
Qualitative
Interview ofEducators &Corporate Management
Questionnaires of employees
TriangulationValidation
Selected ReferencesFraenkel, J.R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate
research in education. (6th ed.) McGraw Hill: New York, N.Y.
Guskey, T.R. (2000). Evaluation professional development. Corwin Press, Inc. Thousand Oaks, California.
Hackett, J. (2005). Exploring the links among professional development: Teacher performance, and student achievement. (Dissertation) Pro-Quest Information and Learning Company, (UMI No. 3169621).
National Staff Development Counsel (2006). Standards. Retrieved on October 27, 2006. from http://www.nsdc.org/standards/about/index.cfm.