previous | table of contents | next

When the U.S. Department of Education contracted with WestEd to conduct a study of eight schools that received department awards for their professional development programs, the first question to answer was What teacher learning opportunities are available in these schools? Next, the study asked How do teachers learn in these schools? These broad questions naturally suggested other questions: What is the structure of the professional development programs? What human and financial resources support ongoing learning? What are the roles of the principal, teachers, and district? and What is the context in which continuous improvement occurs? Under contract to WestEd, Joellen Killion of the National Staff Development Council designed and managed a process to answer these and related questions. (The initial research report is available at http://www.wested.org/ wested/ pubs/ online/ PDawards/.) The first step was to create teacher and principal interview protocols designed to help identify the multiple factors that contributed to success in these schools. Next, eight researchers were selected for their expertise in professional development and/or evaluation. Team members, regardless of their background, took part in interview training and training in methods of data collection and data analysis. Then a two-member site team visited each school for two days. During the two days, the site team conducted in-depth interviews with 3 to 6 teachers and the principal. Brief interviews were also conducted with 4 to 13 more teachers. In some cases, to accommodate teachers’ schedules, group interviews were held at lunchtime and within team meetings. For two of the three schools that had had new principals since the school was recognized, both the former principal and the current principal were interviewed. In total, site teams conducted 30 in-depth teacher interviews (60-90 minutes), 64 brief teacher interviews (30 minutes), and 10 principal interviews (60-90 minutes) between mid-May and late June 1999. Despite hectic schedules at the end of the school year, teachers, students, principals, and support staff graciously welcomed the researchers and eagerly shared their stories. Data collected by each team were analyzed and compiled using a domain analysis process, which allowed the researchers to group similar data from the different schools and to characterize factors that appeared to be important across the eight schools’ diverse settings and circumstances. Analysis of these factors was the major reason for conducting this study. But interview data can yield much more. Data from interviews were also used to develop a number of vignettes and the site profiles in Appendix A. In addition, direct quotes from teachers and principals have been included generously in this report to convey the very real energy and effort behind the data. Many, many teachers were interviewed, more than were necessary simply to "get the story." What we also wanted this report to reflect was what happened for most teachers in these schools, to represent the voice of "every teacher." This is not to say that these are "ordinary" teachers. They are all, in fact, extraordinary. They worked outside their comfort zones. They came together and made decisions to influence the direction of the entire school. They set aside their personal interests for the benefit of their students, working hard and long. They supported and coached one another in a community of learners. And they demanded the best of themselves and their colleagues. Their individual views and collective experience can instruct us all.

What teacher learning opportunities are available in these schools? How do teachers learn in these schools? What is the structure of the professional development programs? What human and financial resources support ongoing learning? What are the roles of the principal, teachers, and district? What is the context in which continuous improvement occurs?     Data collected by each team were analyzed and compiled using a domain analysis process, which allowed the researchers to characterize factors that appeared to be important across the eight schools’ diverse settings and circumstances.       Data from interviews were also used to develop a number of vignettes and the site profiles.       Many, many teachers were interviewed, more than were necessary simply to "get the story." What we also wanted this report to reflect was what happened for most teachers in these schools, to represent the voice of "every teacher."