DESIGNING, IMPLEMENTING, AND EVALUATING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT by Corey J ...

181 Pages·2014·1.85 MB·English

DESIGNING, IMPLEMENTING, AND EVALUATING
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

by

Corey J. Miklus

An executive position paper submitted to the Faculty of the University of
Delaware in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education
in Educational Leadership

Spring 2014

© 2013 Cory J. Miklus
All Rights Reserved
UMI Number: 3631198
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI 3631198
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
DESIGNING, IMPLEMENTING, AND EVALUATING
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

by
Corey J. Miklus

Approved: ____________________________________________________________
Ralph P. Ferretti, Ph.D.
Director of the School of Education

Approved: ____________________________________________________________
Lynn Okagaki, Ph.D.
Dean of the College of Education and Human Development

Approved: ____________________________________________________________
James G. Richards, Ph.D.
Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education
I certify that I have read this executive position paper and that in my
opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the
University as an executive position paper for the degree of Doctor of
Education.

Signed: _______________________________________________________
Sharon Walpole, Ph.D.
Professor in charge of executive position paper

I certify that I have read this executive position paper and that in my
opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the
University as an executive position paper for the degree of Doctor of
Education.

Signed: _______________________________________________________
Doug Archbald, Ph.D.
Member of executive position paper committee

I certify that I have read this executive position paper and that in my
opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the
University as an executive position paper for the degree of Doctor of
Education.

Signed: _______________________________________________________
William Lewis, Ph.D.
Member of executive position paper committee

I certify that I have read this executive position paper and that in my
opinion it meets the academic and professional standard required by the
University as an executive position paper for the degree of Doctor of
Education.

Signed: _______________________________________________________
David Santore, Ed.D.
Member of executive position paper committee
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................vi
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................vii
ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................viii

Chapter
1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1
2 PROBLEM ADDRESSED ..............................................................................11
3 IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES ...................................................................24
4 IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES RESULTS..................................................33
5 REFLECTION ON IMPROVEMENT EFFORT RESULTS ..........................38
6 REFLECTIONS ON LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT ................................41
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................47
Appendix

A READ ALOUD WHITE PAPER..........................................................................49

B IMPLEMENTING A STRUCTURED READ ALOUD PROGRAM..................58

C PHONICS AND FLUENCY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.........73

D TRANSITIONING TO THE MATH COMMON CORE THROUGH THE
USE OF DISTRICT CREATED COMMON CORE EXTENSION LESSONS..97

E WALKTHROUGH FORM TO MONITOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE 8 MATHEMATICAL PRACTICES OF THE COMMON CORE
STATE STANDARDS.......................................................................................107

F SURVEY OF COMMON CORE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT .........122

G COMMON CORE TRAINING..........................................................................137

H PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTING THE
COMMON CORE LITERACY AND WRITING STANDARDS INTO THE
iv
CAREER AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS......................................................146

I WALKTHROUGH FORM TO MONITOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS IN THE CAREER AND
TECHNICAL SUBJECTS.................................................................................156

J ALIGNMENT OF CORE PLUS MATH PROGRAM TO THE COMMON
CORE STATE STANDARDS..........................................................................165

v
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Breakdown of Race at Stokes Elementary ................................................12

Table 2 Other Student Characteristics.....................................................................13

Table 3 Years Experience........................................................................................14

Table 4 Enrollment by Race................................................................................... 15

Table 5 Other Student Characteris.......................................................................... 15

Table 6 District Staffing.......................................................................................... 16

Table 7 District and state DCAS DATA (2011-2012) % proficient........................18

Table 8 District Graduation Rates (Disaggregated).................................................19

vi
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Model for Design of PD Efforts..................................................................3

vii
ABSTRACT
Designing professional development (PD) for teachers is at the heart of instructional
improvement. Based on the PD literature, I grounded my strategies in: working with
experts, working with colleagues, aligned curriculum, practice in classrooms,
observations and feedback, and school wide walkthroughs. This portfolio begins with my
efforts as building principal to design, implement, and monitor the effects of PD in an
elementary school, revealing the challenges inherent in such efforts. I took what I
learned and moved to larger-scale district work. In 2010, the Delaware State Board of
Education adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS, 2010) for all schools in the
state of Delaware. Artifacts illustrate the efforts I made to ensure a coherent and
systematic PD process was in place for teachers in the Caesar Rodney School District for
teachers and administrators. Efforts began with introduction to the standards and ended
with teachers changing some of their instruction. Administrators learned to monitor
implementation efforts. During this initiative I learned that teachers and administrators
are at different levels of willingness and expertise to implement the CCSS. The majority
of teachers reported that their knowledge of the standards has increased but they still are
in need of more carefully aligned curriculum materials. A small portion of teachers
reported that they are fully implementing the standards at their grade level. The
administrators were receptive to the walkthrough documents that I created and are
currently using them on a weekly basis. Based on the feedback I received from teachers
viii
and administrators, I will continue to design more training. Recommendations for future
teacher training include learning progressions based on the standards and specific
strategy instruction. This training must move teacher and administrator understanding of
the standards to a much deeper level of implementation. Other recommendations include
analyzing all curriculum materials used for instruction for their alignment to the CCSS
and refining monitoring documents so that both teachers and administrators are clear on
the teaching and learning expectations required by the CCSS.

ix