Join the conversation

No one would deny that having a high-quality teacher in every classroom is important. Research confirms that effective teaching improves student achievement. So it stands to reason that very few would deny that it’s important for all teachers to have access to high-quality professional learning. After all, research confirms it is a significant pathway to more effective teaching.

Yet as evidenced by a recent report from Learning Forward (formerly the National Staff Development Council), the National Education Association, American Federation of Teachers and Council of Chief State School Officers, far too few states and school districts ensure that their educators have access to effective professional learning activities.

Advancing High-Quality Professional Learning Through Collective Bargaining and State Policy takes an in-depth look at the professional learning policies of six states. The conclusion? Professional learning does not have a significant place in policy and collective bargaining language. But there is hope—the report offers recommendations and examples of collectively bargained language, legislation, regulations and administrative guidelines to inform the development of policy language that can strengthen the quality of professional development in the future.

To learn more about the report and its implications, we spoke to three individuals who each brought a unique perspective to this issue: Joellen Killion (Deputy Executive Director of Learning Forward), Linda Davin (Senior Policy Analyst at NEA) and Joyce Powell (now serving on the NEA Executive Committee after four years as the president of the New Jersey Education Association and decades in the classroom).

Public School Insights: Why is it important to do address professional development through collective bargaining and state policy?

Killion: At Learning Forward, we believe that if there are strong policies in place that set clear expectations, then there will be improved practice. So when collective bargaining language addresses with clarity the importance of the opportunity for teachers to engage in professional development, and when state policy simultaneously provides resources, guidelines and expectations for effective professional development, we believe that the practice of professional development will be improved.

Davin: I couldn’t agree more. Although we know that we can have high quality professional learning in districts where it is not included in collective bargaining language, we also know that professional development can be sustained if it's incorporated into policies that drive the day-to-day operations of the school. Codifying professional learning through collective bargaining agreements and state policies helps ensure that it will actually occur.

Powell: I agree. And I think from a state perspective, part of the goal was bringing this together so that professional learning actually makes sense, so it can have some meaning and some sustainability. That it won't just be happenstance. That it is embedded in the system so that it actually drives practice.

Killion: I think we know with a fair amount of certainty—it is certainly the consensus of the research—that the quality of teaching students experience in the classroom each day influences their achievement. And we also know that professional learning is one of the most important vehicles available to the teachers currently in classrooms to strengthen and refine their practice, and to support them in meeting the challenges of teaching. So ensuring that there is equal access to effective professional learning with appropriate resources for all teachers cannot be left to chance. It is an important system requirement.

Powell: If I might just add that this was our first attempt to bring all of these folks together to begin the discourse at a national level. We'd not really done that before. We hadn’t had those conversations. So for us, that was an important aspect of this project—beginning the dialogue so that we can have some understanding of what would be a better system of professional development, with all the voices in the room.

Public School Insights: Were you satisfied by what you found overall in this review?

Powell: I believe that we accomplished what we set out to accomplish. But this should not be the end product. This really should be a beginning. We can look at what's going on in other states. And remember, when we started this about three years ago, we weren't as sophisticated at identifying the best practices of professional development. We weren't talking in the detail that we do today about professional learning communities. So there are ways to expand what's been presented here.

Killion: We learned a lot in this work. We learned that there is tremendous inconsistency in collective bargaining language and in state policy regarding professional learning, at least in these six states. And we have no specific data to extrapolate to other states.

I think it's fairly safe to say that very few states have a coherent system of professional learning or development. Some states—for example, Ohio over the last few years, and New Jersey recently—have done some tremendous work in strengthening policy, which I think will eventually lead to stronger collective bargaining language as districts work to enact those policies.

I think that's where our challenge is. We are not satisfied with the fact that there's fragmentation and inconsistency. We're not satisfied with the fact that professional development fits into so many different places in state policy without a coherent system. And we want to address some of those issues as we have opportunities to work with state policymakers and with union leaders in districts and states.

So we learned we have work to do. And what we have identified will give us the fuel to begin that work.

Davin: As Joellen (Killion) noted, this publication begins our work. NEA believes that every student deserves a great public school with high-quality teaching. For experienced teachers, professional development is an essential component of improving practice and improving student learning. Additionally, all of us who participated in this project recognize that professional development cannot exist as fragmented, piecemeal improvement efforts, but has to be driven by a clear, coherent plan.

Another point that was driven home was that professional development must be school-based, with an emphasis on improving student learning. And it has to be embedded in the day-to-day work of teachers. We also learned that dedicated time—providing time in the school day—is one of the most challenging issues that confronts school and district leaders.

Professional development can't be an add-on or an afterthought that's cut during budget shortfalls. It has to be an indispensable component of improving student learning. And one of the goals of the project was to determine the best ways to codify professional development through collective bargaining language and state policy.

Public School Insights: The report names twelve professional development policy pathways. The first is standards-based professional development. What do you mean by that, and why do you think it's important?

Killion: At Learning Forward, we have been involved in developing such standards, and supporting and providing resources to help districts and states monitor their implementation. One of the reasons we believe that standards are important is because they are markers that indicate quality. They set a benchmark for what districts, schools, school systems and states should strive to achieve. They help translate research into practice—we are integrating what we know about professional development, adult learning and system change into those standards. And they give us a way of measuring the progress of our professional learning programs. So they help establish a framework for quality.

By having standards I think we can increase access to effective professional learning. And we also have the potential to increase the results we see from investments in professional learning. They can help both policymakers and practitioners make effective decisions about investment in, and standards for, professional development.

Public School Insights: Many states have already adopted the National Staff Development Standards. But the report mentions that standards aren't enough. Earlier you mentioned that time for professional development is one of the most contentious issues in developing effective professional development. Why do you think that is, and what kinds of hurdles do people have to clear, especially in a collective bargaining process, to make time for professional development?

Davin: The time issue is one that's challenging simply because it's often looked at as a funding issue as well. And when dollars are scarce, some districts don't want to commit resources that may not be sustainable.

However, there are ways to structure time in the school day through creative scheduling. It can be done, but it's not easy. School leaders—principals and others—who are committed to embedding professional learning in the school day must be committed to finding the time for teachers to collaborate daily on teaching and learning issues. Building collaborative time into collective bargaining agreements or other policy documents acknowledges its importance and ensures its occurrence.

Powell: Professional development standards really develop the rationale for committing time for high-quality professional development. They give us observable, measurable items that we can look at and say, “These are what help us in providing high-quality professional development, which we need if we want to increase and improve student achievement.”

Public School Insights: One of the twelve policy pathways that has been running through a lot of material recently is that teacher collaboration, which of course also depends on time. From your review, do you think that teacher collaboration is a common feature of current professional development policies and collective bargaining agreements?

Killion: From my own engagement with practitioners, I think that the practice of collaboration is increasing rather exponentially. But I don't believe that is being followed with policies yet.

I think we're making strides. New Jersey has certainly stepped out ahead of the pack with its revision of policy around professional development. But other states and districts have, from my perspective, only begun to have conversations about policies related to collaboration, even though practice is already leading the way.

Davin: As we looked for examples of policy and bargaining language that details regularly dedicated time during the school day for teacher collaboration, we found such language was scarce,. However, school leaders, committed to creating a culture of collaboration and continuous school improvement, must also be committed to finding time and scheduling it in the school day. And I believe that is a challenging task.

But, like professional development, teacher collaboration cannot be a matter of chance. It has to be built into the daily routine of the school. And it's not just about teachers meeting in teams. There has to be a real focus on student learning. To do this well, schools and districts need to invest in professional development to support educators’ effective use of collaborative time by providing assistance in the use of team protocols, goal setting, data analysis, and small group interaction. We also know it is not enough to simply schedule time to meet or provide professional development, all school staff—teachers, administrators, and education support personnel—must be committed to promoting and nurturing a collaborative school culture that supports student success.

Powell: I think we're evolving in the collaboration arena, and finding time within the school day isn't quite as difficult as we once perceived it to be. In the beginning I think everyone was cautious, thinking "Oh, this will take up too much time and energy." Now we're finding that common planning time with professional learning communities has simplified the system for us in a major way. But to actually bargain that, I think we have to get a little more sophisticated.

Public School Insights: Another of the policy pathways involves career paths and teacher leadership. Why do you think that's an important pathway to include in your discussion?

Powell: I think it's important because our teachers are experts in what's absolutely necessary to improve academic achievement. Teachers have phenomenal experiences with what works in a classroom, and being able to share that with their colleagues is very powerful. And if we can give teachers a sense of being leaders, they'll be much more likely to step up to the plate and say, "Yes, we should be doing this, and not looking for outsiders and other entities to determine best practices." Teachers are really good at weeding out what's important and what will work in their classrooms.

I believe teachers have to own professional development in order for it to be meaningful. And that's where I think we see some great strides in the whole arena of professional learning. Just to sit, listen and be nonparticipants is not enough. We need the same engagement with adult learners that we need with students.

Davin: I also think when teachers come together in a collaborative culture there are so many benefits. It promotes the continuous improvement of all educators and provides a forum for new teachers to learn and to feel supported. It also provides the opportunity to discuss and resolve challenging dilemmas of teaching and learning. But, more than anything, it really cultivates a collective responsibility to ensure that all students learn. And there's a sense of empowerment in that for teachers. And as Joyce [Powell] said, they are the experts. They're doing the work on the ground.

Public School Insights: Do you think this report represents a significant change in how people see collective bargaining?

Killion: I think it's difficult for us at this point to make an assessment of whether or not people would view this as a change in collective bargaining. But we're hoping that people recognize that collective bargaining is a tool that can be used for strengthening the professionalism of teaching.

I think many educators have been eager to work not only on their working conditions but also on their professionalism. Collective bargaining is an incredibly powerful vehicle to help us professionalize teaching. And certainly, in looking at how teachers are continuously developed, that's one way that we can really strengthen the profession.

Powell: From the bargaining perspective I believe it is a major change. Ten years ago, we didn’t talk about the teaching and learning process at the bargaining table. It was all about working conditions, salaries, benefits. That was all. Even just within a state organization that's been pretty successful in the collective bargaining arena, it has been a major change to say, "Our teaching and learning process is as important as our working conditions."

To me this report really brought that to a whole new level. I think that it sets a new tone in the collective bargaining arena. I'm not saying that it didn't happen in isolated places before, but for the first time unions are actually saying, "This is as important as the other areas that we have been traditionally bargaining." So I do see it as a major change for traditional union activity.

Killion: When you look at the four national organizations that participated in this project, I think that just this partnership is very powerful in speaking of professional learning and how important it is in terms of the day-to-day work of teachers in improving student learning. I think that the publication is going to be a very important contribution to professional development.

Public School Insights: Are there any questions that I should have asked you, but haven't yet?

Powell: I think the important question is, what's the follow-up? I don't know that we have the answer to that yet, but I think it’s an important question. How will this be utilized to assist others?

Killion: I agree. I think that is a very important question for us to consider. I have some ideas, and I'd love to hear yours.

One of my ideas is that both state policy developers, including those who work at departments of education at the state level and are responsible for professional development and state school boards, who are often responsible for crafting policy related to professional development, use this as a vehicle for launching their own state policy analysis. We've been encouraging our affiliates to do that, and we worked with affiliate leaders this summer to begin the process of analyzing state policy.

I think that can also happen with negotiation teams at the district level. They can begin to study their collective bargaining agreements to determine how professional learning is addressed and where the gaps are, and think about where they might want to craft language that provides the kind of quality professional learning that we've been talking about.

Davin: I would like to see some follow-up research to determine where we are, now, in terms of bargaining language—how many contracts throughout the nation have collective bargaining language focused on the pathways to professional learning that we outlined in the report, as well as the extent to which state policy supports professional development and collaborative learning teams. I think that would be a very interesting study [to expand the scope of this report].

Powell: I couldn't agree more. And the publication has some great ideas and recommendations in Part 3 about how we can expand this work in the future.