by Hayes Mizell
Guest Columnist EdNews.org
Distinguished Senior Fellow
National Staff Development Council

(this column appears in March 2007 edition of NSDC's newsletter, The Learning System )

Let's face it. Many school system leaders are confounded by the last six words of the National Staff Development Council's goal: All teachers in all schools will experience high-quality professional learning as part of their daily work. "Why is this necessary?" they ask. "How is it possible?"

In most school systems, staff development has been an occasional event. There was an assumption that teachers could rely on their pre-service education, supplemented now and then by a summer college course and a few days of "in-service" each school year.

In today's context of state standards, assessment, and accountability, not to mention the No Child Left Behind Act, these views are not only outmoded, but quaint. Public education has changed dramatically, but staff development has not kept pace. New circumstances have pushed most educators to the limits of their knowledge and skills, even if they are reluctant to admit it. They are ill-served by professional development that does not effectively address their needs and cause them to become more successful in educating their students. Professional learning can be a major answer to this problem, but only if it is qualitatively and quantitatively greater than past efforts.

Time is a precious resource in schools and it seems there is never enough of it. Most school system leaders do not begin with the assumption and create the expectation that teachers are entitled to team learning time and they do not create such time. That leads teachers and principals to believe they can't create the time they need to engage routinely in high-quality professional learning.

Thankfully, the NSDC web site (http://www.www. nsdc.org) has a wealth of information about school systems that are moving towards professional learning as "a part of their daily work." Your query about how to make time for professional learning should begin with a ruthless assessment of how your school or system currently uses available time. For example, some middle-level schools that provide a daily common planning period may conclude that teacher teams could more productively use this time for their own learning. Schools may also find that rather than creating a standard block of time for this purpose, they can better use scheduled meetings during the week. These might include faculty meetings, departmental meetings, and time provided by delayed starts or early dismissals. A school that takes full advantage of such opportunities for professional learning will be well on its way towards developing a more energized and effective staff.

While some schools are taking significant steps in this direction, most are not. They may not feel that their school systems are giving them the permission and support they need to shake off the dust of traditional staff development and craft more effective modes of professional learning. In spite of the brief era of "school-based decision-making," most principals and faculties continue to look to their school systems for major initiatives in policy and practice. Schools need to know that their school systems both expect them to make high-quality professional learning a daily activity, and will provide the technical assistance they need to meet that expectation. Without the leadership of school boards, superintendents, and central office administrators, most schools will assume that moving towards school-based professional learning entails unnecessary risk. Each school system is responsible for sending a very different, positive message, partnering with schools to develop practical approaches that will make high-quality professional learning part of educators' daily work.

Published March 13, 2007