page 7 of 13
Evaluators' Overall Program Ratings
As a culminating task in their analysis, evaluators were asked to place each project on a five level
continuum describing the quality of the professional development program.
As can be seen in Table 12, none of the 46 projects was rated at Level 1 (Predominance of
Ineffective Professional Development), and only 1 project (2 percent) was considered to be at the
Level 2, "Exploring" stage. Nine projects (20 percent) were rated at Level 3 (Transitioning to
Quality Professional Development). Twenty- six projects (57 percent) were rated at Level 4
(Emerging Infrastructure of Well- Designed Professional Development), indicating that their
professional development plan and activities incorporated many features reflective of current
standards- based approaches, that the professional development activities were well- implemented,
and that in the evaluator's judgment they will likely enhance participants' capacity to provide
high quality mathematics/ science instruction to their students. The final 10 projects (22 percent)
were rated at Level 5, indicating consistently excellent quality.
Table 12
Continuum Ratings for Quality of LSC Professional Development 2
| |
Percent of Projects* |
|
All Projects |
K-8 Science |
K-8 Mathematics |
7-12 Mathematics |
Level 1:
Predominance of Ineffective Professional Development |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Level 2:
Exploring Quality Professional Development |
2 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
Level 3:
Transitioning to Quality Professional Development |
20 |
28 |
8 |
0 |
Level 4:
Emerging Infrastructure of Well- Designed Professional Development |
57 |
48 |
67 |
75 |
Level 5:
Predominance of Well- Designed Professional Development |
22 |
21 |
25 |
25 |
| Mean Continuum Rating Level |
4.0 |
3.9 |
4.2 |
4.3 |
* Projects that address two subject areas are included in each subject, but counted only once in the total of all projects.
Summary
- Both participating teachers and project evaluators indicated that LSC projects are providing
fairly high- quality professional development. Forty percent of participating teachers rated
the LSC professional development excellent or very good, with those that had participated
for more hours more likely to rate it highly.
- Teachers were most likely to give the LSC professional development high marks for
providing a wealth of opportunities for mathematics/ science related professional
development and for providing support as they implement what they have learned. In each of
those areas, teachers rated LSC professional development much higher than professional
development prior to the LSC. In contrast, there were only small differences between the
LSC and "prior" professional development in the extent to which teachers were given time to
work with other teachers, or to reflect on how to apply what they have learned to the
classroom.
- As was the case in previous years of the core evaluation, evaluators noted a number of key
strengths of LSC professional development:
- Professional development facilitators are generally highly skilled;
- The projects have typically been successful in creating a collegial and supportive environment;
- Linking professional development to exemplary instructional materials has proven to be
an effective way to simultaneously model inquiry- based strategies and address teacher
content needs;
- Many of the projects have been able to be responsive to participants' emerging needs; and
- Attention to systemic issues and the broad framework of national standards in
mathematics and science has enhanced the quality of the LSC professional development
programs.
- Providing time for teachers to consider the applications of what they are learning and to share
with one another was one of the key aspects distinguishing effective from ineffective LSC
professional development. Some evaluators cited attention to providing these opportunities
as a key strength of the professional development programs; at the same time, lack of time
for reflection was the aspect of professional development sessions most often mentioned as
needing further attention.
- While links to curriculum materials were clearly beneficial in numerous ways, evaluators
cautioned that in focusing on the use of kits, projects risk losing the emphasis on key
mathematics and science concepts, pointing out the need to keep the "big picture" in mind.
Footnote
2A number of projects reported observing professional development sessions in addition to those rated for the core evaluation; these additional
observations were considered by evaluators when making overall ratings of the project's professional development system.
