ppt on inservice education

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Inservice education

Related Papers

Anindita Ukil

TEXILA INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL RESEARCH

Nuzhat Sultana

Ramin Ravangard

Introduction: Due to the vital role of nurses and the effects of scientific advances on nursing care, providing high quality nursing services is not possible without participating in the in-service training programs and becoming familiar with the new techniques. This study aimed to determine the motivational factors influencing the participation in the in-service training courses among nurses working in the teaching hospitals affiliated to Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in 2013. Method: This was an applied, cross-sectional and descriptive-analytical study. A sample of 216 nurses working in the teaching hospitals affiliated to Shiraz University of Medical Sciences was selected using stratified sampling proportional to size and simple random sampling methods. The required data were collected using a questionnaire determining the motivational factors influencing the nurses' participation in the in-service training courses, including personal factors, organizational factors, ...

marzieh javadi

Article History: Received: 30 May 2017 Revised: 29 Jul 2017 Accepted: 11 Sep 2017 Background: The need for training throughout the whole occupational life time of a personnel is crucial. As educational needs of all personnel in hospitals are not the same, planning for holding in-service training courses is complex and sensitive, which in some cases causes incidence of challenges and different taste in training. Understanding these challenges and offering solutions to them are really important. Methods: This research was a qualitative study, conducted through a phenomenological approach, for which structured interviews were used to collect data. A total of 10 training supervisors, training volunteers, and administrators of clinical sections, who had been chosen through a targeted method were interviewed. The average duration of interviews was 35 minutes, and their analysis was done through content analysis method. Results: In this research, five primary codes and fifteen secondary co...

Acta Facultatis Medicae Naissensis

Hossein namdar areshtanab

Summary Generally, progress, productivity and success of any organization depends on the skills and knowledge of their manpower. Thus, better and more accurate training programs in organizations will lead to their growth and efficiency will be eventually achieved. Due to the many advances in the field of medicine, nurses are the backbone of activities in organizations of medical sciences and patient’s affairs. For this purpose, in-service training courses for employees are the most important courses in nursing. This study was conducted at the University of Medical Sciences (Tabriz-Iran) aiming to determine the preferred learning styles of nurses in in-service training courses. In this cross-sectional study, all nurses working in medical and educational centers in a university in the North West of Iran were randomly selected. To collect data, a two-part questionnaire of Kolb’s demographic and social information was used. Data was analyzed by using descriptive and analytical statistic...

Open Access Publishing Group

During the last two decades, particular significance is given to employee training as part of a radical restructuring of work process, which primarily associates with rapid scientific and technological developments and their impacts. Within this context, Continuing Nurse Education is one of the basic conditions to meet nursing educational needs and consequently upgrades the quality of health services, achieves a better working environment and ensures job satisfaction of nurses. The basic aim of this study is to detect the attitudes and views on human recourses training but also to explore the possibility of transforming the educational needs of nurses in training programmes, within in-service training. The response rate of nurses in the survey questionnaire, which involved the recording of demographic, educational, scientific and employment data as well as the incentives for participating, was around 47%, an amount that deemed sufficient to draw conclusions. The analysis of survey results highlighted the need for Continuing In-Service Nurse Education that has to be updated, systematic and qualitative so as to meet the training needs and the scientific pursuits of nurses. In addition, through the assessment of results of such training the aim is to occur similar comparative studies and general conclusions in future.

Revista de Pesquisa: Cuidado é Fundamental Online

Claudia Mara De Melo Tavares

Objetivos: Conhecer a percepção de enfermeiros sobre o processo de aprendizagem do programa de treinamento em serviço e analisar o programa de treinamento em serviço do setor de Educação Permanente. Método: Estudo descritivo, quanti-qualitativo e de Campo, através de uma entrevista semi-estruturada analisada segundo a Análise de Conteúdo de Bardin. Resultados: Emergiram três categorias: Descontinuidade do processo de treinamento, O Tempo como um determinante do processo ensino-aprendizagem e O processo de trabalho como fator decisivo na organização dos treinamentos em serviço. Conclusão: É preciso adequar as necessidades de serviço à forma de apresentação dos treinamentos, levando em consideração a realidade do processo de trabalho, buscando alinhar a efetividade dos treinamentos ao desenvolvimento profissional, minimizando confrontos existentes entre os profissionais treinados e sua resistência às ações de Educação Permanente. Descritores: Educação continuada em enfermagem, Capacit...

Leonard Burrello

International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences

Mohammad Safari

SMaking a responsive, favorable and efficient official system can be realized thorough training courses based on its current and future needs. The main aim of organizational trainings is facilitating organizations staff improvement in all aspects. On the other hand, what makes planning and administering organizational trainings legal, is their efficiency degrees. Since, the constant improvement of training system is a vital necessity in advancing organizational goals, this study tries to examine components affecting efficiency and effectiveness of in-service training in organizations. The results can be applied by authorities of short-term training courses of Tehran Municipality Organization. Outcomes of the present study revealed that some components like training need assessment and adjusting education system with organization strategies have key roles in improving efficiency and effectiveness of in-service training courses in organizations.

Journal of Nursing Ufpe Online

Silvio Matos

How to Subscribe

Free Trials

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section Inservice Teacher Education

Introduction.

Highly Adaptive Models of Professional Development
Structured Professional Learning Communities
Specified Instructional Approaches
Highly Specified Professional Development
Salient Research Articles on Teacher Professional Learning
Salient Theoretical Articles on Teacher Professional Learning
Salient Texts and Chapters on Teacher Professional Learning

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming articles expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section.

Gender, Power, and Politics in the Academy
Girls' Education in the Developing World
Non-Formal & Informal Environmental Education
Find more forthcoming articles...
Export Citations
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Inservice Teacher Education by Karen Koellner , Deborah Greenblatt LAST REVIEWED: 21 April 2021 LAST MODIFIED: 22 February 2018 DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756810-0196

Inservice teacher education is broadly defined as any learning opportunity for practicing teachers. The term inservice teacher designates a teacher that has certification or is already teaching in a classroom, in contrast to a preservice teacher , who is in the process of preparing to become a teacher. Preservice and inservice teacher learning have changed over time. This is due to the evolution of how the field has moved. In particular, there has been a shift from many educators aligning with behavioral theories of teaching and learning to more constructivist, sociocultural, and situated theories of teaching and learning. Inservice teacher education has gone from one-shot workshops where an expert imparts knowledge to teachers in a traditional lecture-style workshop to more professional learning opportunities where teachers engage in communities of learning: unpacking content, examining teachers’ instruction, and analyzing student thinking. Through this evolution, inservice teacher education has become synonymous with professional development or professional learning. These trends and the different ways that the field of education conceptualizes teaching and learning have broad yet important implications for inservice teacher education and professional development. In particular, the language and jargon associated with the field has changed to reflect the transformed theories or stances. For instance, the terms inservice teacher education and staff development are now more commonly referred to as teacher professional development and professional learning respectively. Due to this evolution of the field and the aligned adjustments in terminology in this article, we purposefully use the vocabulary that is consonant with the article under review in this volume. Additionally, this annotated bibliography builds on the Oxford Bibliographies in Education article by Stephanie Hirsch, Joellen Killion, and Joyce Pollard titled “ Professional Development ,” but provides a distinct framework and selection of annotations. We have selected articles that focus on the impact of professional development on one or more of the following: teachers’ knowledge, teachers’ instructional practices, and student learning. We also put forth a new theoretical construct to analyze research on inservice teacher education and professional development. Synthesizing and detailing the best current knowledge on teacher professional development (PD), this annotated bibliography highlights (1) research on the impact of different models of inservice teacher education on teacher learning and instruction and/or student learning, (2) handbooks and handbook chapters related to inservice learning and professional development, and (3) salient reports, theoretical articles, and meta-analyses that have been written on professional development and inservice teacher education.

Professional Development Impact Studies

There is general agreement that the quality of teaching has been shown to be the most important contributor to student learning and achievement. Thus, the field of teacher education has placed a premium on research and development efforts to better understand the impact of professional development (PD) interventions on teachers’ knowledge and practice as well as student learning and achievement. Toward this end, researchers are studying which professional development programs and characteristics of programs promote the highest degree of teacher and student growth. Professional development models come in a range of different formats and structures, yet there is emerging consensus on what high-quality, effective professional development looks like (National Academy of Education, 2009). Borko, et al. 2010 (cited under Salient Research Articles on Teacher Professional Learning ), a review of the literature, presents a synthesis of the characteristics of high-quality professional development organized around content, process, and structure. With respect to content, research highlights the importance of focusing professional development on students’ thinking and learning. With respect to process and structure, participating actively and collaboratively in professional learning communities appears to be essential. Given this general agreement in terms of these broad outlines for professional development, one might expect that recently developed models would look relatively similar to one another. However, this is not the case. As suggested in Koellner and Jacobs 2015 (cited under Structured Professional Learning Communities ) we argue that there is an important distinction between the formats of professional development that are currently available to teachers, with implications for research, policy, and practice. We posit that professional development models fall on a continuum of adaptability (Borko, et al. “Using video representations of teaching in practice based professional development programs,” Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik: International Reviews on Mathematical Education (2011) and Koellner and Jacobs 2015 ). Using this continuum enables professional development models to be located on a scale from highly adaptive to highly specified professional development models. Those at the highly adaptive end are designed to be readily responsive or adapted to the goals, resources, and circumstances of the local professional development context. These models are based on general and evolving guidelines rather than specific content, activities, and materials. On the other end of the continuum are highly specified approaches to professional development, where goals, content resources, and facilitation materials are provided to ensure a particular, predetermined professional development experience with fidelity to the developers. In specified PD, the experience is expected to be finite in nature, often based on published materials with stated learning goals, explicit design characteristics, and extensive supports for facilitators. Naturally, there are professional development programs that lie on points all along this continuum, with varying levels of specificity and adaptability. Additionally, the same professional development model could be placed at different points on the continuum based on the enactment by the facilitator. This bibliography is organized along this continuum of adaptability. This allows the reader to see how the characteristics of the professional development model are related to the impact on teacher and student learning. Furthermore, this lens allows the reader to make connections between the design of the professional development and the design of the research methodology. We argue that these relationships have critical implications for our understanding of the effectiveness, responsiveness, and rigor of professional development research. We begin by reviewing research that focuses on professional development models that are adaptive, and then move to more specified models. We categorize these as highly adaptive, adaptive, specified, and highly specified. We do not pinpoint an exact placement on the continuum, but instead discuss them based on our interpretation on the goals, content, and resources identified. At the end of the article, we provide annotations for handbooks, salient reports and theoretical articles, and meta-analyses that have been written on professional development and inservice teacher education that seem highly relevant for a deep understanding of the field.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content on this page. Please subscribe or login .

Oxford Bibliographies Online is available by subscription and perpetual access to institutions. For more information or to contact an Oxford Sales Representative click here .

About Education »
Meet the Editorial Board »
Academic Achievement
Academic Audit for Universities
Academic Freedom and Tenure in the United States
Action Research in Education
Adjuncts in Higher Education in the United States
Administrator Preparation
Adolescence
Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate Courses
Advocacy and Activism in Early Childhood
African American Racial Identity and Learning
Alaska Native Education
Alternative Certification Programs for Educators
Alternative Schools
American Indian Education
Animals in Environmental Education
Art Education
Artificial Intelligence and Learning
Assessing School Leader Effectiveness
Assessment, Behavioral
Assessment, Educational
Assessment in Early Childhood Education
Assistive Technology
Augmented Reality in Education
Beginning-Teacher Induction
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism
Black Undergraduate Women: Critical Race and Gender Perspe...
Blended Learning
Case Study in Education Research
Changing Professional and Academic Identities
Character Education
Children’s and Young Adult Literature
Children's Beliefs about Intelligence
Children's Rights in Early Childhood Education
Citizenship Education
Civic and Social Engagement of Higher Education
Classroom Learning Environments: Assessing and Investigati...
Classroom Management
Coherent Instructional Systems at the School and School Sy...
College Admissions in the United States
College Athletics in the United States
Community Relations
Comparative Education
Computer-Assisted Language Learning
Computer-Based Testing
Conceptualizing, Measuring, and Evaluating Improvement Net...
Continuous Improvement and "High Leverage" Educational Pro...
Counseling in Schools
Critical Approaches to Gender in Higher Education
Critical Perspectives on Educational Innovation and Improv...
Critical Race Theory
Crossborder and Transnational Higher Education
Cross-National Research on Continuous Improvement
Cross-Sector Research on Continuous Learning and Improveme...
Cultural Diversity in Early Childhood Education
Culturally Responsive Leadership
Culturally Responsive Pedagogies
Culturally Responsive Teacher Education in the United Stat...
Curriculum Design
Data Collection in Educational Research
Data-driven Decision Making in the United States
Deaf Education
Desegregation and Integration
Design Thinking and the Learning Sciences: Theoretical, Pr...
Development, Moral
Dialogic Pedagogy
Digital Age Teacher, The
Digital Citizenship
Digital Divides
Disabilities
Distance Learning
Distributed Leadership
Doctoral Education and Training
Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) in Denmark
Early Childhood Education and Development in Mexico
Early Childhood Education in Aotearoa New Zealand
Early Childhood Education in Australia
Early Childhood Education in China
Early Childhood Education in Europe
Early Childhood Education in Sub-Saharan Africa
Early Childhood Education in Sweden
Early Childhood Education Pedagogy
Early Childhood Education Policy
Early Childhood Education, The Arts in
Early Childhood Mathematics
Early Childhood Science
Early Childhood Teachers in Aotearoa New Zealand
Early Years Professionalism and Professionalization Polici...
Economics of Education
Education For Children with Autism
Education for Sustainable Development
Education Leadership, Empirical Perspectives in
Education of Native Hawaiian Students
Education Reform and School Change
Educational Statistics for Longitudinal Research
Educator Partnerships with Parents and Families with a Foc...
Emotional and Affective Issues in Environmental and Sustai...
Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
Environmental and Science Education: Overlaps and Issues
Environmental Education
Environmental Education in Brazil
Epistemic Beliefs
Equity and Improvement: Engaging Communities in Educationa...
Equity, Ethnicity, Diversity, and Excellence in Education
Ethical Research with Young Children
Ethics and Education
Ethics of Teaching
Ethnic Studies
Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention
Family and Community Partnerships in Education
Family Day Care
Federal Government Programs and Issues
Feminization of Labor in Academia
Finance, Education
Financial Aid
Formative Assessment
Future-Focused Education
Gender and Achievement
Gender and Alternative Education
Gender-Based Violence on University Campuses
Gifted Education
Global Mindedness and Global Citizenship Education
Global University Rankings
Governance, Education
Grounded Theory
Growth of Effective Mental Health Services in Schools in t...
Higher Education and Globalization
Higher Education and the Developing World
Higher Education Faculty Characteristics and Trends in the...
Higher Education Finance
Higher Education Governance
Higher Education Graduate Outcomes and Destinations
Higher Education in Africa
Higher Education in China
Higher Education in Latin America
Higher Education in the United States, Historical Evolutio...
Higher Education, International Issues in
Higher Education Management
Higher Education Policy
Higher Education Research
Higher Education Student Assessment
High-stakes Testing
History of Early Childhood Education in the United States
History of Education in the United States
History of Technology Integration in Education
Homeschooling
Inclusion in Early Childhood: Difference, Disability, and ...
Inclusive Education
Indigenous Education in a Global Context
Indigenous Learning Environments
Indigenous Students in Higher Education in the United Stat...
Infant and Toddler Pedagogy
Inservice Teacher Education
Integrating Art across the Curriculum
Intelligence
Intensive Interventions for Children and Adolescents with ...
International Perspectives on Academic Freedom
Intersectionality and Education
Knowledge Development in Early Childhood
Leadership Development, Coaching and Feedback for
Leadership in Early Childhood Education
Leadership Training with an Emphasis on the United States
Learning Analytics in Higher Education
Learning Difficulties
Learning, Lifelong
Learning, Multimedia
Learning Strategies
Legal Matters and Education Law
LGBT Youth in Schools
Linguistic Diversity
Linguistically Inclusive Pedagogy
Literacy Development and Language Acquisition
Literature Reviews
Mathematics Identity
Mathematics Instruction and Interventions for Students wit...
Mathematics Teacher Education
Measurement for Improvement in Education
Measurement in Education in the United States
Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis in Education
Methodological Approaches for Impact Evaluation in Educati...
Methodologies for Conducting Education Research
Mindfulness, Learning, and Education
Mixed Methods Research
Motherscholars
Multiliteracies in Early Childhood Education
Multiple Documents Literacy: Theory, Research, and Applica...
Multivariate Research Methodology
Museums, Education, and Curriculum
Music Education
Narrative Research in Education
Native American Studies
Note-Taking
Numeracy Education
One-to-One Technology in the K-12 Classroom
Online Education
Open Education
Organizing for Continuous Improvement in Education
Organizing Schools for the Inclusion of Students with Disa...
Outdoor Play and Learning
Outdoor Play and Learning in Early Childhood Education
Pedagogical Leadership
Pedagogy of Teacher Education, A
Performance Objectives and Measurement
Performance-based Research Assessment in Higher Education
Performance-based Research Funding
Phenomenology in Educational Research
Philosophy of Education
Physical Education
Podcasts in Education
Policy Context of United States Educational Innovation and...
Politics of Education
Portable Technology Use in Special Education Programs and ...
Post-humanism and Environmental Education
Problem Solving
Productivity and Higher Education
Professional Development
Professional Learning Communities
Program Evaluation
Programs and Services for Students with Emotional or Behav...
Psychology Learning and Teaching
Psychometric Issues in the Assessment of English Language ...
Qualitative Data Analysis Techniques
Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Research Samp...
Qualitative Research Design
Quantitative Research Designs in Educational Research
Queering the English Language Arts (ELA) Writing Classroom
Race and Affirmative Action in Higher Education
Reading Education
Refugee and New Immigrant Learners
Relational and Developmental Trauma and Schools
Relational Pedagogies in Early Childhood Education
Reliability in Educational Assessments
Religion in Elementary and Secondary Education in the Unit...
Researcher Development and Skills Training within the Cont...
Research-Practice Partnerships in Education within the Uni...
Response to Intervention
Restorative Practices
Risky Play in Early Childhood Education
Scale and Sustainability of Education Innovation and Impro...
Scaling Up Research-based Educational Practices
School Accreditation
School Choice
School Culture
School District Budgeting and Financial Management in the ...
School Improvement through Inclusive Education
School Reform
Schools, Private and Independent
School-Wide Positive Behavior Support
Science Education
Secondary to Postsecondary Transition Issues
Self-Regulated Learning
Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices
Service-Learning
Severe Disabilities
Single Salary Schedule
Single-sex Education
Single-Subject Research Design
Social Context of Education
Social Justice
Social Network Analysis
Social Pedagogy
Social Science and Education Research
Social Studies Education
Sociology of Education
Standards-Based Education
Statistical Assumptions
Student Access, Equity, and Diversity in Higher Education
Student Assignment Policy
Student Engagement in Tertiary Education
Student Learning, Development, Engagement, and Motivation ...
Student Participation
Student Voice in Teacher Development
Sustainability Education in Early Childhood Education
Sustainability in Early Childhood Education
Sustainability in Higher Education
Teacher Beliefs and Epistemologies
Teacher Collaboration in School Improvement
Teacher Evaluation and Teacher Effectiveness
Teacher Preparation
Teacher Training and Development
Teacher Unions and Associations
Teacher-Student Relationships
Teaching Critical Thinking
Technologies, Teaching, and Learning in Higher Education
Technology Education in Early Childhood
Technology, Educational
Technology-based Assessment
The Bologna Process
The Regulation of Standards in Higher Education
Theories of Educational Leadership
Three Conceptions of Literacy: Media, Narrative, and Gamin...
Tracking and Detracking
Traditions of Quality Improvement in Education
Transformative Learning
Transitions in Early Childhood Education
Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities in the Unite...
Understanding the Psycho-Social Dimensions of Schools and ...
University Faculty Roles and Responsibilities in the Unite...
Using Ethnography in Educational Research
Value of Higher Education for Students and Other Stakehold...
Virtual Learning Environments
Vocational and Technical Education
Wellness and Well-Being in Education
Women's and Gender Studies
Young Children and Spirituality
Young Children's Learning Dispositions
Young Children's Working Theories
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility

[66.249.64.20|185.66.15.189]
185.66.15.189

Guide to Study
eLearning Activity
Registration/Sign In
Bio Data Form/ Conflict of Interest Statement
Faculty CNE Checklist

Inservice and Continuing Education

Inservice education.

It is recognized that educational activities play an important role in marketing, establishing loyalty and enhancing company image. To that end, education programs have been developed for presentation to your nurse and allied health clients. It is important that you recognize your educational activities as value-added service. Offer them to your customers in the same way you would offer to sell your other products.

The following sections will deal with educational activities, some specific terminology and process information with an emphasis on continuing education.

Let’s start with the difference between inservice and continuing education …

Inservice = activities intended to assist the professional nurse to acquire, maintain and/or increase competence in fulfilling the assigned responsibilities specific to the expectations of the employer.

Basically it means information required by a person in order to do their job properly at a specific place. An inservice can be delivered to a group or one-on-one. It can be scheduled during a dedicated time frame (e.g., monthly inservice time) or it can be quite impromptu.

In order to illustrate the concept of inservice, let’s look at an example:

“ Hey, Jim…I missed yesterday’s education program. What gives with this ‘new technology’ equipment? Can you show me?” “Sure thing. Let’s go into the lounge.”

In the example, one staff member asks for help from another staff member: instruction on a piece of equipment owned by that institution. There is no formal process: no advance planning or published objective, no faculty credentialing, no formal evaluation. There is no minimum time frame, no documentation of attendance, and no certificate. Learning will no doubt occur. Jim will provide the information he recalls from his own learning experience. It will probably be sufficient to cover competent operation of the equipment, so it will definitely be an inservice.

Next: Inservice & Continuing Education—Continuing Education

Knowing the difference between inservice and continuing education will enhance your professional image

In-service Teacher Education

Jul 29, 2014

610 likes | 3.81k Views

In-service Teacher Education. In-service Teacher Education refers to all programs and schemes through which teachers who are already employed avail teacher education and training for upgrading their knowledge and skills. Distance Education program.

Share Presentation

share experiences
francis xavier
service programs
higher level courses
sherubtse college
internal b ed

Presentation Transcript

In-service Teacher Education • In-service Teacher Education refers to all programs and schemes through which teachers who are already employed avail teacher education and training for upgrading their knowledge and skills.

Distance Education program • The Distance Education program for in-service teacher is a Bachelor of Education degree in pry education. • The course is based on internal B.ed (pry) program. It is a five year program. • It was started in December 1995 and the first batch of candidate passed out in 2003.

Goals and objectives • To provide opportunities to express, reflect and share their experiences as classroom practitioners. • To develop a liking and commitment to learner centered teaching rather than syllabus teaching • To create an awareness that changes in teacher attitude and teacher readiness precede changes in education. • To provide work and context relevant teacher education by relating theory and practice.

Master of Education • It is a part time Education for Heads of the schools • Paro college of Education in collaboration with St. Francis Xavier ( St .fx) university in Canada provides this course • It aims at enhancing the leadership capacity of the existing secondary school heads • The purpose of the program is to equip heads of schools with effective administration and management skills.

Nature of the course • The Ten years course to be offered in this program are adapted from those currently offered at St. Francis Xavier. • The content is mainly on leadership and management, which are very demanding academically. • The need for long term institution based training for Heads of school was discussed and endorsed as a necessity at both the Annual Education Conference and at the Teacher Education Board

Aims of the program • To provide the heads of the schools with an appropriate course to help them fulfill their roles effectively • Help improve the management of schools • Enable the heads of the schools to provide leadership to both teachers and students in their respective schools.

Objectives of the program • Provide a diploma level course to those heads of community and pry schools which had not availed higher level courses. • Organized the course once a year during the winter vacation of three consecutive years.. • Enable the heads of schools to manage changing trends in education system.

Other in-service programs 1, PGCITS. post graduates certificate in Teaching Information science, held in Sherubtse college • PGDE post graduates diploma in English started in 2004 in sherubtse college. • Lead teacher program It focuses on specializing pry teachers in teaching PC math's and English, started in 2006 at SCE

NBIPs • National based in-service program are held for various purposes • The first ever workshop for 150 teachers in the so called Environmental Studies was jointly run by SCE and PCE in 1985

SBIPs • School based in- service programs are also held after following the NBIP • DBIP and CBIP are also conducted in some parts of the country

More by User

In-Service Teacher Training

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in AS Level English Language 8693 Session 2: Question papers and mark schemes. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 2 looks at:. Summative assessment The mark scheme for Paper 1

400 views • 10 slides

In-Service Teacher Education: US

In-Service Teacher Education: US. Deborah Hughes Hallett Department of Mathematics, University of Arizona Harvard Kennedy School. The US Context. Teachers are (too) busy keeping up with everyday requirements (often non-academic)

493 views • 34 slides

Teacher education in Finland

Teacher education in Finland. - In brief. Class and Subject Teachers. Class teachers are qualified to teach all subjects in years 1-6 Class teachers’ basic requirement is a Master’s degree (300 ECT) majoring in education sciences (one credit=27 hours of ‘work’)

1.17k views • 9 slides

TEACHER EDUCATION

TEACHER EDUCATION. 2004-2005. I made it through my first year!. Reminding Myself – The Start of a School Year. Look to my teaching Value what’s creative and possible in my teaching Try something new Examine what I’m teaching about teaching. Look to my individual professional goals

365 views • 21 slides

Weaving sustainability education across pre-service teacher education

Weaving sustainability education across pre-service teacher education Tasmanian Sustainability Education Forums – December, 2013 Libby Tudball. Drivers for the inclusion of EFS….

432 views • 27 slides

Partnerships in Teacher Education

Partnerships in Teacher Education. Dr Alison Jackson University of Cumbria. 1. What are the questions we need to ask about partnerships in teacher education? 2. What is needed to create effective partnerships in teacher education?.

200 views • 8 slides

Teacher Education

Inspired Education Services is a Gold Coast dyslexia tutoring and consultancy service provider led by Sarah Mitchell which diagnoses and supports learners with dyslexia and other specific learning difficulties. For more info Visit: http://inspirededucationservices.com.au/

125 views • 7 slides

Improving Assessment Practices through In-service Teacher Education

Improving Assessment Practices through In-service Teacher Education. Case Study of Master of Education Students. LITERATURE. Sinha (p.247) comments:

365 views • 33 slides

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in AS English Language 8693 Session 1: Introduction to the Syllabus. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 1 looks at:. Formative assessment Syllabus aims Structure of the syllabus Assessment Objectives

148 views • 14 slides

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in IGCSE English as a Second Language 0510 Session 3: Mark schemes and Examiners Reports. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 3 looks at :. Resources Mark schemes as a resource Principal Examiners’ Reports

225 views • 21 slides

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in IGCSE Mathematics 0580/0581 Session 1: Introduction to the Syllabus. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 1 looks at:. Syllabus aims The structure of the syllabus Assessment Objectives The development of different skills

251 views • 17 slides

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in IGCSE Biology 0610 Session 2: Question papers and mark schemes. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 2 looks at:. How question papers are set • T he construction of questions • Grade descriptions

326 views • 31 slides

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in IGCSE English as a Second Language 0510 Session 2: Question papers and mark schemes. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 2 looks at:. Summative assessment The construction of question papers and mark schemes

256 views • 22 slides

In-Service Teacher Training. Assessment in IGCSE Business Studies 0450 Session 2: Question papers and mark schemes. Welcome. Introductions Background Aim of training. Session 2 looks at:. how question papers are set how mark schemes are constructed. Assessment process stages.

131 views • 10 slides

ICT in teacher education

ICT in teacher education. What can be achieved by using ICT?. developing ICT skills implementing aspects of autonomous learning individual learning – adaptation to needs group learning – socialisation developing cultural awareness developing reflection through writing and discussion

400 views • 27 slides

Communication and Nursing Education by

Get full access to Communication and Nursing Education and 60K+ other titles, with a free 10-day trial of O'Reilly.

There are also live events, courses curated by job role, and more.

In-Service Education

1. introduction.

In-service education is a type of education that is provided to the employees while they are on the job so as to improve their working capacity and efficiency. The concept of in-service education is in budding form in India, whereas in western countries it has grown fully and has become an essential requirement of professional growth of a nurse.

2. NATURE AND SCOPE OF IN-SERVICE EDUCATION

Health care industry is complex and ever changing; therefore, nurses need to be professionally competent in order to survive in this era of increasing law suits against health care professionals as well as increasing health care cost. Research has exploded the knowledge horizon of the nursing sciences, and a graduate ...

Get Communication and Nursing Education now with the O’Reilly learning platform.

O’Reilly members experience books, live events, courses curated by job role, and more from O’Reilly and nearly 200 top publishers.

Don’t leave empty-handed

Get Mark Richards’s Software Architecture Patterns ebook to better understand how to design components—and how they should interact.

It’s yours, free.

Check it out now on O’Reilly

Dive in for free with a 10-day trial of the O’Reilly learning platform—then explore all the other resources our members count on to build skills and solve problems every day.

Changing Expectations for the K-12 Teacher Workforce: Policies, Preservice Education, Professional Development, and the Workplace (2020)

Chapter: 6 opportunities for learning through inservice professional development, 6 opportunities for learning through inservice professional development.

Well-designed preservice teacher preparation may supply new teachers with a significant foundation for the work of teaching in the 21st century, but cannot, in a short period of time, aspire to preparing teachers for all they must know and do. Meanwhile, an array of classroom studies provides evidence that many practicing teachers are not prepared to teach in ways that align with new expectations or that are responsive to a more diverse student population. Most teachers will require substantial changes to what they do on a daily basis if they are to respond productively to changing demographics and to new expectations for student learning (e.g., see Cobb et al., 2018 ; Osborne et al., 2019 ). Studies of professional development (PD) in key content domains (mathematics, science, literacy, social studies) demonstrate the challenges that teachers experience in shifting their stance from one of supplying explanations to one that engages students in collaborative inquiry ( Kazemi and Franke, 2004 ; Osborne et al., 2019 ; Roth et al., 2011 ). Making substantial changes to teachers’ perspectives and practices will require significant and sustained opportunities for professional learning ( Borko, 2004 ; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015 ).

This chapter concentrates on the contribution to teacher learning that may be made by formally structured PD programs, including both those located at school sites and a wide range of programs and experiences outside the school context. The committee notes that schools with a record of improvement tend to be those where teachers have access to high-quality PD and also experience a workplace culture marked by strong professional community ( Bryk et al., 2010 ; McLaughlin and Talbert, 2001 ). Thus, this

chapter and the following chapter on workplace-embedded opportunities are intended to be complementary.

Following a brief introduction, this chapter begins by characterizing patterns of teacher participation in designated PD activity as reported in national surveys. It then takes up the question of how emerging forms and foci of PD represent responses to shifting student demographics and evolving expectations for what students should know and be able to do. The next section considers evidence for the effectiveness of PD with respect to desired teacher and student outcomes. The final section of the chapter turns attention to the role of the larger system and the policies and practices that bear on the availability and quality of PD for teachers.

As a preface to the discussion in this chapter and in the following chapter on teacher learning in the workplace, the committee notes that the category of “practicing teachers” and the corresponding category of “in-service education” may be too broad to help educators and policy makers think productively about implications derived from changing student demographics and expectations for student learning. Teachers vary with respect to the PD needs they experience and the interests they may express. In particular, teachers’ career stages may affect how they encounter current conditions and expectations, as well as what they find to be relevant and meaningful learning opportunities.

Newly prepared (or novice) teachers may enter teaching having been well grounded in new expectations for pursuing greater conceptual depth, enabling student inquiry and sense-making, integrating new forms of technology, and working effectively with a diverse group of students (as articulated in Chapter 3 ). For these teachers, inservice learning demands likely center on how to enact the ideas and practices they have encountered in their preparation while mastering classroom management and navigating the school workplace culture. This may also include balancing these demands against an increasing push to utilize differing forms of technology during teaching while also responding to the continued paperwork burden that is prevalent. Relevant supports include well-designed systems of induction and mentoring, as well as the preparation of principals and other school leaders to aid beginning teachers.

In contrast, more experienced teachers who are faced with new expectations for student learning and new images of teaching practice confront a problem of change. Relevant supports for these teachers may take the form of structured PD, coaching, access to relevant instructional resources, the opportunity to work with colleagues to shift ideas and practice, and the support of principals or other leaders in managing change.

Finally, teachers increasingly take on an array of leadership roles, some of which (e.g., instructional coach, writing curriculum pacing guides) may

be a direct response to the changing expectations for student learning outlined in Chapter 3 . Such roles may reflect the broader response to the move toward more in-depth learning and innovative instruction or they may reflect the vestiges of narrowly defined test-based accountability systems. A growing body of research examines how these roles have been defined and enacted, but few studies explore how teachers are recruited into these roles and how they are prepared and supported to succeed in them.

THE GROWTH OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES

Educators, education scholars, school and system leaders, and policy makers treat teacher PD as a vehicle for advancing a more ambitious vision of teaching and learning for all students. Although estimates of the financial investment in PD vary widely depending on the model used to construct them, they add up to thousands of dollars per teacher per year ( The New Teacher Project, 2015 ; Odden et al., 2002 ; Rice, 2001 ). In principle, such programs constitute a significant complement to learning opportunities embedded in teachers’ daily work in classrooms and schools.

A dramatic proliferation of PD providers dates back to the advent of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act in the mid-1960s; opportunities for PD escalated in the wake of the 1983 Nation at Risk report ( Little, 1989 ). Districts emerged during that period as significant decision makers regarding the form and content of PD and as PD providers in their own right. By the mid-1980s, the National Education Association reported a 15-year decline in teachers’ participation in university course work and a corresponding increase in attendance at district-sponsored workshops and conferences ( National Education Association, 1987 ). Reform movements multiplied in the 1980s and 1990s, culminating in the standards and accountability movement that has induced some states to require continuing education units from teachers; during this period of increased reform, a marketplace of PD providers emerged, many of them (including universities) packaging their services for district or school consumption. In the 21st century, the landscape has grown still more diversified as PD providers capitalize on technological advances to offer online PD options to individual teachers as well as to their employing organizations. Indeed, the landscape of inservice PD is just as sprawling as that of preservice preparation; observers have repeatedly noted its fragmented or nonsystemic character (e.g., Borko, 2004 ; Dede et al., 2009 ; Wilson and Berne, 1999 ), although recent research supplies examples of coherent approaches at the school and district level ( Bryk et al., 2010 ; Cobb et al., 2018 ; Coburn and Russell, 2008 ).

PATTERNS OF TEACHER PARTICIPATION

As detailed below, nationally representative surveys supply a partial picture of teachers’ participation in formal PD. The Fast Response Survey System survey of 2000 and the Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) questionnaires for 2003–2004, 2007–2008, and 2011–2012 include items that focus on the amount and type of PD in which teachers participated in a 1-year period and on teachers’ perceptions of the usefulness of selected PD. Unfortunately, the National Teacher and Principal Survey (successor to SASS), conducted in 2015–2016, preserved questions about teachers’ preservice preparation but eliminated items related to teachers’ subsequent participation in PD. The 2018 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education (NSSME+), conducted by Horizon Research, Inc., reports data on PD for teachers of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects, but there appears to be no comparable national survey of teachers in other subject areas.

Teachers’ Participation in PD

Rotermund, DeRoche, and Ottem (2017) draw on the 2011–2012 SASS data to provide the most recent descriptive national profile of teachers’ participation in PD. Overall, 99 percent of teachers reported participating in some form of PD in 2011–2012. Subject-specific PD constituted the predominant focus (85% of teachers), followed by the instructional use of computers (67%). On the whole, elementary and secondary teachers reported that subject-specific PD and PD on computers was useful (see Table 6-1 ).

The 2011–2012 SASS data also provide indications of teachers’ participation in PD targeted at two specific student populations: English learners and students with disabilities. Relatively few teachers reported participating in PD focused on teaching students with disabilities (37%) or English learners (27%). On the whole, the majority of teachers reported that PD on teaching students with disabilities was useful (44%) or very useful (22%), while 30 percent indicated it was somewhat useful. Teachers’ perceptions

TABLE 6-1 Teachers’ Reported Perceptions of Professional Development (PD) in Percentage, by Usefulness

SOURCE: 2011–2012 SASS data.

of the usefulness of PD on teaching English learners indicated they found it slightly less useful than other PD; 18 percent very useful, 41 percent useful, and 34 percent only somewhat useful. Subject-matter PD tended to be longer in duration (nearly 80% more than 8 hours), while about two-thirds of PD related to teaching students with disabilities or English learners was less than 8 hours. A comparison of these patterns with those reported earlier by Parsad et al. (2001) based on a 2000 survey suggests that the investment in PD for a diverse student population has remained relatively low even though teachers in the earlier survey reported feeling inadequately prepared to teach students from diverse cultural backgrounds. This is important as some states (e.g., Florida) license renewal requirements include a specific number of hours for retooling in special education or English learning for license renewal.

Mathematics, Science, and Computer Science Teachers’ Participation in PD

According to the 2018 NSSME+ Report ( Banilower et al., 2018 ), mathematics, science, and computer science teachers report that participating in discipline-specific PD programs or workshops is the most common form of PD in which they participate. On the whole, about 80 percent or more of science, mathematics, and computer science teachers have participated in content-specific PD in the past 3 years ( Banilower et al., 2018 , p. 47). However, elementary science teachers are an exception; less than about 60 percent reported participating in discipline-specific PD in the past 3 years (p. 47). Perhaps not surprisingly, high school teachers report having participated in more hours of discipline-specific PD than elementary teachers in both science and mathematics. The authors summarized trends in number of discipline-specific hours as follows:

[A]bout a quarter of middle school and about a third of high school science teachers have participated in 36 hours or more of science professional development in the last three years; very few elementary teachers have had this amount of professional development in science. A similar pattern exists in mathematics, with about 2 in 5 secondary teachers having participated in at least 36 hours of mathematics-focused professional development in the last three years compared to fewer than 1 in 6 elementary teachers. (p. 48)

Importantly, both science and mathematics teachers across elementary, middle, and secondary indicated that a focus on how to incorporate students’ cultural backgrounds into instruction was relatively rare, with only about a quarter of science teachers and 20 percent of math teachers indicating having received PD with this focus (p. 56).

In addition, the 2018 NSSME+ Report indicated “differences in the extent to which science and mathematics classes with different demographic characteristics have access to teachers who have had a substantial amount of professional development” (p. 49). Namely, in science, classes that serve a high proportion of historically underrepresented students in STEM and classes composed mostly of students who previously achieved at lower levels “are significantly less likely than classes serving high prior achievers [and students who have been historically well-represented in STEM] to be taught by teachers who have participated in more than 35 hours of professional development in the last three years” (p. 49). Further, students attending small schools, on average, have less “access to teachers who have participated in a substantial amount of professional development” (p. 49). However, “mathematics classes with the highest proportion of students from race/ethnicity groups historically underrepresented in STEM are more likely than their counterparts to be taught by teachers who have participated in more than 35 hours of professional development in the last three years” (p. 49).

Overall, most teachers report having had access to PD in recent years, and most report that the PD they have experienced has been at least somewhat useful. However, survey data also signal areas in which PD opportunities may be under developed or unevenly distributed (e.g., with respect to teaching science, teaching students with special needs, or supporting English learners).

EMERGING FORMS OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

The past two decades have witnessed not only a steadily growing marketplace of providers, but also new developments in the type of PD experience available to teachers and in their orientation to changing expectations for teachers and teaching. These developments include the emergence of online programs and platforms and learning from practice by way of video and other artifacts of teaching and learning.

Online Programs and Platforms

In the past two decades, one prominent development in inservice PD, as in preservice teacher education, has been the growing turn to online programs and platforms to support teacher learning and innovation. A review of the extant literature about online PD turns up multiple studies focused on programs and platforms targeted to particular populations of teachers: special education teachers (including teacher of both students identified as having “disabilities” and “gifted”), rural teachers, and teachers of particular subjects. Although a thorough review of these studies extends

beyond the scope of this report, the sheer number of them attests to the growth of online programs and platforms.

Online platforms, such as those offering teaching videos and other resources, are multiplying faster than the research; although not yet validated by research, this includes teachers sharing resources using a variety of platforms (e.g., Pinterest, Teachers Pay Teachers). A literature review published by Dede and colleagues (2009) predates a number of the currently available studies, but the authors noted at the time that the available research suffered from an overemphasis on short-term program evaluation and a reliance on self-reported experiences and outcomes. The authors recommended a more rigorous approach to research design, more of a focus on actual learner interactions, a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods suitable to the research questions, multiple outcome measures, and a longitudinal timeframe to capture trajectories of learning and subsequent practice.

In one empirical study that might be judged at least partially responsive to these recommendations, Fishman and colleagues (2013) employed a randomized experiment to compare teacher and student outcomes associated with teachers’ participation in a face-to-face PD or an online version of the same PD. 1 They acknowledge the critiques put forward by Dede and colleagues (2009) but observe that since 2009, “Studies of teachers learning from online PD that employ experimental design with randomization and control groups have started to address the linkages between teachers’ learning, practice, and student learning outcomes” (p. 3). They nonetheless caution:

Online PD is not monolithic. It makes little sense to ask questions about whether “it” is more or less effective than any other PD modality. . . . Thus, when considering questions of comparative effectiveness, it is critical to clearly identify design features of PD opportunities in question. (p. 4)

Fishman and colleagues (2013) found no difference in outcomes between the group engaged in face-to-face PD and the group participating in an online program. “In online and face-to-face PD conditions, teachers reported increased confidence with new curriculum materials, enacted those materials consistently with curriculum designers’ intent, and their students learned from curriculum successfully and in equal amounts” (p. 2). 2

Some models of PD have capitalized on advances in technology-aided simulation in other fields ranging from military and flight training to medicine. In an experimental design study in 10 sites in six states, Dieker and

___________________

1 The program was designed to prepare high school teachers to implement a year-long environmental science curriculum.

2 Teachers in the online condition first received a face-to-face orientation to the online platform.

colleagues (2014) investigated the contributions of avatar-based simulation and supplemental online PD to improvements in the performance of middle school mathematics teachers. Researchers randomly assigned teachers to one of four groups: (1) a treatment group that received lesson plans aligned with the Common Core for the teaching of linear equations, together with a 40-minute online PD focused on five strategies for formative assessment; (2) a treatment group that received the lesson plans and participated in the TeachLivE simulator, including an “after-action-review” segment; (3) a treatment group that received the lesson plans, the online PD experience, and the TeachLivE simulator experience without the after-action-review; and (4) control. All teachers were observed teaching the designated lesson and their students tested (using items derived from National Assessment of Educational Progress data) prior to the random assignment and again following completion of the treatment series. Analysis of teaching observations focused on teachers’ use of questioning to elicit student thinking, their use of wait time, and their feedback to students. Researchers found that treatment teachers in both groups that included a TeachLivE experience increased their use of higher order questions to elicit student thinking and their specific feedback to students across the four virtual events and in their real classrooms. The highest gains in classroom performance accrued to the TeachLivE-only condition that included an after-action-review segment.

The emergence of online programs and other technological tools give rise to the question of how these new resources and opportunities fit with the organizational environment that teachers inhabit in their schools and districts. In a book addressed to school and district leaders, Rodman (2019) observes that teachers have responded to the persistence of “sit-and-get” PD by turning to online opportunities to secure new instructional resources and to learn from and with other teachers:

Teachers . . . have begun to speak out against this unilateral system and form their own professional learning networks (PLNs) via Twitter and Voxer chats, edcamps, massive open online courses (MOOCs), blogs, and podcasts. Such networks not only connect teachers with like-role peers beyond their school but also provide on-demand professional learning in a variety of different formats. As PLNs continue to grow, so does an unprecedented wealth of text, video, and planning resources. However, while these experiences may help individual educators who have the drive and commitment to seek them out, they do little to foster a community of professional inquiry within a school or district. (pp. 1–2)

As Rodman notes, teachers have turned to a wide array of online venues for ideas, resources, and assistance. To the committee’s knowledge, these venues—some of which assert that they are research-based—have not yet been the focus of empirical investigations. However, research on the use

of online platforms in the context of structured PD programs suggests that this technological resource may help to expand teachers’ access to opportunities specifically designed to meet changing expectations.

Learning in and from Practice Through Artifacts of Teaching and Learning

For the past two decades, advances in PD practice and research have been prominently marked by the potential for teachers’ learning in and from practice. As noted in the previous chapter on preservice teacher education, Ball and Cohen (1999) supplied a compelling rationale for learning in and from practice as a means of joining a teacher’s subject matter knowledge to a specialized knowledge for teaching. Roth and colleagues (2011) add,

A key feature of analysis-of-practice approaches is teacher inquiry into their own practice as a vehicle for learning and PD. However, it is difficult in a real-time context for teachers to conduct inquiries into their teaching practices in a way that addresses all their complexity. One solution to this realistic problem is to use artifacts of practice, such as student work and assessment products, teacher lesson plans and notes, and lesson videos. (p. 118)

In the evolving landscape of PD, two approaches to learning in and through practice have gained particular prominence over the past two decades: Lesson Study and video clubs and other forms of video-based PD.

Lesson Study

The instructional improvement strategy termed “Lesson Study” gained popularity in the United States following the publication of the findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. In their book The Teaching Gap , Stigler and Hiebert (1999) characterized this Japanese form of PD—a collaborative inquiry approach strongly embedded in the culture of teaching and schools—as a model worthy of emulation. More specifically, as practiced in Japan:

Lesson study consists of cycles of instructional improvement in which teachers work together to: formulate goals for student learning and long-term development; collaboratively plan a “research lesson” designed to bring to life these goals; conduct the lesson in a classroom, with one team member teaching and others gathering evidence on student learning and development; reflect on and discuss the evidence gathered during the lesson, using it to improve the lesson, the unit, and instruction more generally; and, if desired, teach, observe, and improve the lesson again in one or more additional classrooms. ( Lewis, 2009 , p. 95)

Early studies of Lesson Study illuminated both the potential benefits of and the challenges associated with introducing a model that in certain key respects runs against the grain of U.S. teachers’ accustomed interactions with one another ( Fernandez, 2002 , 2005 ). Although Lesson Study shares some features with previously implemented practices of learning from student work in the United States, it differs centrally in the place occupied by the collective observation of live classroom practice. In an essay that took stock of this evolving innovation, Lewis, Perry, and Murata (2006) noted that “the simple practice of observation in colleagues’ classrooms for the purpose of professional learning is rare in the United States” (p. 3).

Over time, research has come to focus on the adaptation of Lesson Study to a range of contexts. However, Lewis and Perry (2017) note that “lesson study has been researched mainly through small-scale, qualitative studies by investigators directly involved in lesson study implementation” (p. 265). In a significant exception, one recent randomized, controlled trial (RCT) study examines the role of Lesson Study as an intervention in the scale-up of efforts to improve the teaching and learning of fractions in grades 2–5 ( Lewis and Perry, 2017 ). 3 More than 200 educators (87% of them classroom teachers) from 27 school districts were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) an experimental condition in which teams conducted lesson study focused on fractions, aided by a research-based mathematics (fractions) resource kit; (2) a “business as usual” condition in which teachers in teams chose their own approach to learning and their own focus, but were asked not to pursue lesson study on fractions; and (3) a lesson study condition in which teacher teams could choose their topic and were supplied with lesson study tools but not with the mathematics resource kit. The kit was designed to help teachers delve into the instructional affordances of different mathematical tasks, grapple with what students are likely to find difficult, and plan an approach to the cycle of planning, implementation, observation, and reflection.

Lewis and Perry (2017) assessed gains in educators’ own knowledge of fractions for teaching with a 33-item instrument derived from previously tested item banks and focused mainly on conceptual knowledge as required to navigate particular teaching contexts (e.g., “how to adjudicate a disagreement between two students about whether 1/2 of Andrew’s books was more than 1/5 of Steve’s books” (p. 274)). Student learning was measured by a grade-appropriate test including items drawn from national and state assessments, published curricula, and research publications. In addition,

3 The design of this RCT study permits researchers to examine the processes (video recorded) and outcomes of a lesson study on a large scale, managed and led by local educators rather than experts; it also permits a test of the lesson study cycle integrated with curricular resources of the sort commonly available in Japan.

participating educators completed an end-of-project self-report survey on which they rated the quality of their experience.

Results show a statistically significant effect on educators’ fractions knowledge for the treatment condition (lesson study plus resource kit; effect size = 0.19). Students of teachers in the treatment condition also significantly outperformed students in the other conditions (effect size = 0.49). Analysis of a subset of PD meeting videos indicates which elements of the mathematics resource kit compelled most attention (e.g., videos of fractions lessons taught in Japanese classrooms), and otherwise suggests how the availability of the resource kit may have contributed to the measured outcomes. Students of teachers who adopted the Japanese lesson demonstrated higher learning gains than those whose teachers pursued an alternative approach. Written reflections provided examples of particular insights that emerged from the discussions in the experimental condition ( Lewis and Perry, 2017 ):

In the past, I have worked hard to make fractions very hands-on and visual, but not once did I consider using a linear model.

A great deal of our discussions prior to beginning this lesson study was spent on how we . . . teach fractions . . . here at our school. Each of us used the typical pizza cut up or candy cut up to show . . . fractional parts. However . . . this . . . didn’t lead to full understanding. . . . Teaching fractions in a linear manner was a real aha moment for all of us on the team. (p. 287)

Although the most prominent outcomes of this RCT study were associated with the experimental condition, educators’ own reported perceptions of professional learning quality show nearly equivalent high ratings from educators in the two lesson study conditions, and substantially lower ratings from those in the “business as usual” condition. Overall, Lewis and Perry (2017 , p. 289) report that “lesson study supported by a mathematical resource kit showed a significant impact on both educators’ fractions knowledge and students’ fractions knowledge after controlling for baseline fractions knowledge, hours of instruction, and other relevant variables.”

Video-Based Collaborative Professional Development

Since 2000, and especially in the past decade, video-based PD has occupied an increasingly prominent place in the published research on PD, especially in mathematics and science ( Borko, Koellner, and Jacobs, 2011 ; Luna and Sherin, 2017 ; Roth et al., 2011 ; Santagata, 2009 ; Seago, 2004 ; Sherin and Han, 2004 ; van Es et al., 2014 ; van Es, Tekkumru-Kisa, and

Seago, in press ). Roth and colleagues (2011) underscore the particular virtues of video as an artifact for teachers’ collective attention:

Using video and other artifacts also provides a common point of reference for teachers’ collaborative discussions and anchors teachers’ discourse, keeping it focused on content, teaching, and learning. . . . For example, shared analysis of the same lesson video challenges each member to provide evidence from the video to support claims and judgments which can then be evaluated by others in the group. (p. 118)

One of the earliest and most widely cited contributions detailed teachers’ gradual transition from a focus on teachers’ actions to a focus on students’ mathematical reasoning over the course of year-long participation in a “video club” facilitated by expert mathematics educators ( Sherin and Han, 2004 ). In that video club project, facilitators invited teachers to establish a focus for their attention and discussion and noted the shift in focus over time. In other PD projects, facilitators have oriented teachers to specific aspects of teaching and learning, such as the nature of students’ science argumentation (Zembal-Saul, 2005).

Although several studies trace changes in teachers’ ability to notice and analyze selected aspects of classroom interaction, few have attempted to relate teachers’ participation in video-based PD to changes in classroom practice and student learning. In one exception, Borko and colleagues (2015) report the changes in mathematics instruction and student achievement associated with teachers’ participation in the Problem-Solving Cycle (PSC) PD, in which video analysis plays a central role. The PSC model engages teachers in a series of interconnected workshops built around a common “rich mathematical task,” as defined by several criteria (e.g., tasks that encompass important mathematical concepts and skills, have multiple entry points and solution paths, are accessible to learners with varying levels of mathematical knowledge). Teachers begin each cycle by working together to solve the selected mathematical task and to develop lesson plans for teaching the task in their own classrooms. Video recordings of the teachers’ implementation of the lessons form the basis of the second and third workshops in the cycle, in which teachers devote close attention to the nature of students’ mathematical reasoning and consider the role of the teacher in supporting student learning. Over the course of the three workshops, teachers learn how to elicit and respond to student thinking and consider a range of instructional strategies for cultivating rich mathematical discourse in the classroom.

Borko and colleagues (2015) draw on data collected over 5 years to assess changes in teacher knowledge and instructional practice and to examine impact on student achievement. Pre- and post-administration of the

Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching (MKT) assessment for middle school teachers showed significant positive gains on average for 62 participating teachers, although the absence of a control group necessarily limits claims regarding effectiveness of the PD in this respect.

To investigate changes in classroom practice, the researchers employed the Mathematical Quality of Instruction (MQI) instrument to analyze 51 videotaped lessons taught by 13 teachers; the analysis compared implementation of the collaboratively developed PSC lessons with “typical” lessons taught by the same teacher. Overall, teachers’ instruction over time was demonstrably stronger when they were teaching the collaboratively developed PSC lessons built around a “mathematically rich task” than when they were teaching their typical lessons. Teachers made the greatest improvement on the MQI dimension labeled “working with mathematics and students,” with gains evident in both the PSC and typical lessons. Borko and colleagues (2015) report that “over time, the teachers were better able to understand and build on their students’ mathematical ideas and help them work through their errors in a conceptual manner” (p. 54). Teachers showed a gain in the richness of the mathematics tasks in PSC lessons, but not in typical lessons, suggesting that availability of well-designed tasks and the collaborative setting of the PSC may be important factors in teachers’ ability to enact more ambitious instruction. Student participation ratings were high in both types of lessons and across time, but ratings dropped somewhat as the richness of tasks and conceptual focus increased. In judging the promise of the PSC model, the researchers note, “One especially encouraging finding is the fact that the teachers in our study improved their ability to listen to students’ ideas and make sound instructional decisions based on those ideas” (pp. 64–65).

Finally, Borko and colleagues (2015) examined student achievement on the Colorado Student Achievement mathematics assessment, comparing the students of PSC teachers, the students of middle school teachers in the same district who were not participating in the PSC, and middle school students across the state. In 4 of the 5 PSC years, students of the participating PSC teachers outperformed other students in the district. (Both groups in this district outperformed the state average in all years.) The achievement results are suggestive but not conclusive, given the absence of random assignment and changes in the composition of the PSC cohort from year to year.

In the domain of science, Roth and colleagues (2011) employed videocases in a year-long PD program for elementary teachers (Science Teachers Learning from Lesson Analysis, or STeLLA) to investigate changes in teachers’ science content knowledge, ability to analyze science teaching, classroom instruction, and student learning. The study’s quasi-experimental design entailed a comparison of two groups of teachers, both of which had completed the same 3-week summer institute focused on science content, and one of which elected to participate in additional summer and

school-year analysis-of-practice activity. Although the teachers were not randomly assigned, they did not differ with respect to their education, science background, or teaching experience. Teachers in the experimental group showed significantly greater gains in content and pedagogical content knowledge and in their ability to analyze video-based lessons (although they showed some decline in that ability during the school year). Both groups completed a science content test and a video-based lesson analysis task, but only the experimental group was observed in the classroom. In pre-post observations, experimental teachers showed increased use of the recommended science teaching strategies associated with both a “science content storyline” lens and a “student thinking” lens emphasized in the PD, and their students outperformed the students in the comparison content-only group.

Especially given its increasing prominence, further research is needed to understand crucial aspects of designing and implementing video-based collaborative PD that supports teachers to meet changing expectations and to serve an increasingly diverse student population. Van Es and colleagues (in press) offer a comprehensive framework to guide the design, implementation, and study of video-based collaborative PD. Their framework includes what they refer to as six dimensions, or “critical features of video-based activity systems for teachers” (p. 5): audience, goals/purpose, video selection, task design, planning/facilitation, and assessing learning. As they cogently argue, most studies of video-based PD foreground a specific dimension (e.g., the role of the facilitator), resulting in a limited understanding of the broader activity system in which the use of video is embedded, and thus a limited understanding of how and why a particular video-based PD program results, or does not, in the intended learning outcomes. An additional advantage of the application of a comprehensive framework for the study of video-based PD is that it can support the field to engage in comparative analysis across studies, and thus accumulate knowledge across studies.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT SUPPORTS TEACHERS TO MEET CHANGES IN EXPECTATIONS AND IN STUDENT POPULATIONS

As indicated above, nationally representative samples indicate that on the whole, practicing teachers participate in formally structured programs of PD. However, little is known about the quality of PD that the average teacher receives, especially in relation to heightened expectations for teaching and student learning, and changes in the student populations that the average teacher serves. While the evidence remains mixed regarding the extent to which PD results in desired changes to teachers’ knowledge and practice, and in student learning, there has been some progress in the field in the past two decades in discerning features and theories of action of PD that appear to impact teachers’ practice and student learning.

Research published in the 1990s and early 2000s resulted in a purported “emerging consensus” on selected design features of effective PD. Desimone (2009) summarized the basis for this consensus and argued that research would be strengthened by attending more systematically to five distinguishing features of effective PD: the depth of focus on subject matter content and how students learn it; sufficient provision for teachers to engage in “active learning;” a coherent connection to teachers’ own work and to prevailing local and state policy; “collective participation” by teachers of the same school, department, or grade level; and adequate duration for teachers to develop new understandings and instantiate them in their teaching. She posited a conceptual model in which these five design features constitute foundational conditions that in turn enhance teacher knowledge, skill, and dispositions; stimulate and enable related changes in instructional practice; and ultimately generate positive student learning outcomes.

At the time it was first touted a decade ago, this “emerging consensus” rested on somewhat tenuous ground, especially when tested against expectations for gains in student learning. Desimone (2009 , p. 183) acknowledged that only a “handful of studies” had included measurement of student outcomes. In addition, some experimental-design research framed by the recommended “PD design features” yielded mixed results, leading reviewers to cast doubt on the power of PD programs to advance teacher knowledge and practice or to enhance student learning. Mixed or null results from some studies—studies that employed randomized experimental designs and that measured both teacher and student outcomes—posed a particular threat to the reported consensus. Two widely cited experimental design studies, one focused on second-grade reading ( Garet et al., 2008 ) and the second on middle school mathematics ( Garet et al., 2010 ), found only minimal positive results for teachers and no significant positive results for students despite implementing PD interventions closely aligned with the features in the “consensus” model.

Such studies suggest the complexity of pursuing significant change in teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, dispositions, and practices through programs of organized PD; however, they may also point to the limitations of the conceptual model and some aspects of the research design. With respect to the latter, for example, Garet and colleagues (2010) note that, “The observation protocol measured the degree to which each provider’s plan was implemented but it did not measure the quality of the delivery or the accuracy of the mathematics presented” (p. 24). That is, design features alone may not serve well as proxies for the quality of teachers’ PD experience, and the resulting research may not have uncovered aspects of implementation that could account for weak results.

More recent empirical studies, literature reviews, and meta-analyses have found consistent evidence of positive outcomes while also suggesting

the limitations of a conceptual model oriented principally to generic features of PD design (e.g., opportunities for “active learning”). Kennedy (2016) , in a review of 28 experimental design studies of PD in core academic subjects conducted between 1975 and 2014, rejected the focus on design features and defined programs instead in terms of “underlying theories of action” that addressed a “central problem of practice” in teaching. Similarly, in a study of elementary grades science PD, Grigg and colleagues (2013) focused not on PD design fidelity but on the degree to which learners (teachers in the PD; students in the classroom) demonstrably engaged in five features of scientific inquiry: defining scientifically oriented questions, giving priority to evidence in responding to questions, formulating explanations from evidence, connecting explanations to scientific knowledge, and communicating and justifying explanations. By specifying these features of scientific inquiry as their focal point, Grigg and colleagues theorized the mechanism by which they predicted students’ learning gains would be realized. Their analysis suggests that conceptual, empirical, and practical gains from PD research likely require that the meaning of key design features (e.g., “active learning” or “collective participation”) be more fully theorized and specified, and that they be probed in-depth at the level of both PD and classroom practice.

The discussion that follows centers on two bodies of research that bear particularly on the capacity of the teacher workforce to respond to heightened expectations for student learning and changing student demographics: content-focused PD and PD targeted at teachers’ capacity for working with a diverse student population.

Impact of Content-Focused Professional Development

Over the past two decades, and despite mixed results in some studies, the field has accumulated a body of increasingly rigorous research on organized programs of PD, especially in math, science, and literacy. Studies employing experimental and quasi-experimental research designs and studies incorporating measures of student learning outcomes have multiplied. Rotermund, DeRoche, and Ottem (2017) , in their preface to a National Center for Education Statistics summary of the 2011–2012 SASS survey results on teachers’ participation in PD, write:

Although past literature on professional development has found little causal evidence of its impact on student achievement, recent research on the effects of individual programs of professional development has found some positive effects on student outcomes ( DeMonte, 2013 ; Heller et al., 2012 ; Polly et al., 2015 ; Yoon et al., 2007 ). In addition, two meta-analyses of research on professional development found statistically significant effects ( Blank and de las Alas, 2009 ; Gersten et al., 2014 , p. 1).

More recently, a meta-analysis of 95 experimental or quasi-experimental studies of the impacts of preK–12 STEM-related curriculum and/or PD programs on student learning indicate that, on the whole, PD with the following characteristics yields benefits for teachers and students ( Lynch et al., 2019 ): “the use of professional development along with new curriculum materials; a focus on improving teachers’ content and pedagogical content knowledge, or understanding of how students learn; and specific formats, including meetings to troubleshoot and discuss classroom implementation of the program, the provision of summer workshops to begin the professional development learning process, and same-school collaboration” (p. 294). The authors highlight advances in research design over the past two decades, writing that “following calls in the early 2000s for stronger research into the impact of educational interventions . . . federal research portfolios began to prioritize research methods that allow causal inference and to use student outcomes as the major indicator of program success” (p. 260).

In some respects, the meta-analysis findings paralleled those identified in previous reviews as elements of the “emerging consensus” regarding PD design ( Desimone, 2009 ; Wei et al., 2009 ). For example, programs achieved stronger outcomes when teachers participated in PD programs with colleagues from their school. This finding is consistent with the broader research base, and likely reflects the benefit of a shared commitment to trying out what was learned in a PD program, and of having colleagues with whom to determine how to employ or adapt what was learned in a specific teaching context. In addition, Lynch and colleagues (2019) found that outcomes were stronger when the PD programs included what they refer to as “implementation meetings,” or opportunities to “convene briefly with other activity participants to troubleshoot and discuss obstacles and aids to putting the program into practice” (p. 276).

More generally, Lynch and colleagues note that the “programs studied recently contain more varied delivery methods and features (e.g., coaching, online learning components) than those of a decade ago” (p. 264). On average, they found that programs that included an online component had positive effects on student outcomes but that such programs “yielded significantly smaller effects” on student outcomes, as compared to programs that did not include an online component (p. 276).

In another echo of prior research, Lynch and colleagues (2019) found that average effect sizes were larger when the PD “focused on improving teachers’ content and pedagogical content knowledge and/or how students learned the content” (p. 275). Their findings underscore the importance that PD be content-specific; PD focused on “content-generic instructional strategies was not a significant predictor of effect size magnitude” (p. 275). On the whole, the authors also found that effect sizes were largest where programs combined PD with new curriculum materials (as compared to PD only, absent

curriculum materials). This finding is consistent with qualitative studies of PD as well, which have suggested that it is important that PD be “close to practice” and that it support teachers to make sense of the actual materials they teach with (e.g., Ball and Cohen, 1999 ; Kazemi and Franke, 2004 ).

However, Lynch and colleagues (2019) found that not all PD involving new curriculum materials yielded desired effects. For example, they cite a comprehensive review by Slavin and colleagues (2014) , who report “programs that used science kits did not show positive outcomes on science achievement measures (weighted ES=0.02 in 7 studies), but inquiry-based programs that emphasized professional development but not kits did show positive outcomes (weighted ES=0.36 in 10 studies)” (p. 870). Science kits supply teachers with materials for hands-on science activities and guidelines for their use, but the accompanying PD (if any) may or may not include a focus on underlying science concepts and processes or guidance with respect to inquiry-oriented instructional practices. Slavin and colleagues (2014) report,

A surprising finding from the largest and best-designed of the studies synthesized in the present review is the limited achievement impact of elementary science programs that provide teachers with kits to help them make regular use of hands-on, inquiry-oriented activities. These include evaluations of the well-regarded FOSS, STC, Insights, Project Clarion, and Teaching SMART programs, none of which showed positive achievement impacts. (p. 894)

The lack of effects associated with kit-based science PD suggests that future research would benefit from closer attention to the relationship between PD emphases and the local curriculum-in-use, as well as the measures used to assess learning outcomes.

Finally, Lynch and colleagues (2019) found “no evidence of a positive association between the duration of professional development,” which included both number of hours and timespan, and “program impacts” (p. 285). Although this finding is contrary to what some prior reviews have suggested ( Desimone, 2009 ; Scher and O’Reilly, 2009 ; Yoon et al., 2007 ), it is consistent with Kennedy’s (2016) review of PD for teachers of core academic subjects (language arts, mathematics, the sciences, and the social sciences). As Lynch and colleagues (2019) write, “Our findings echo those of Kennedy (1999 , 2016 ), who did not find a clear benefit of contact hours or program duration, and concluded that the core condition for program effectiveness was valuable content; more hours of a given intervention will not help if the intervention content is not useful” (p. 285).

Although Lynch and colleagues (2019) meta-analysis focused exclusively on studies in the STEM fields, RCT studies in the domain of literacy have also shown significant positive results for teacher and student learning. For example, an IES-funded RCT study of the National Writing Project’s College-Ready Writers Program ( Gallagher, Arshan, and Woodworth, 2017 )

examined the implementation and outcomes of a 2-year initiative to enhance students’ argument writing in 44 districts served by 12 National Writing Project (NWP) sites in 10 states (see also Olson et al., 2012 ). The researchers found a positive, statistically significant impact on students’ argument writing in the 22 treatment districts (effect size 0.20).

In another example, Vernon-Feagans and colleagues (2015) conducted an IES-funded RCT study of the Targeted Reading Intervention (TRI) in high-poverty rural schools. The intervention tested face-to-face vs. webcam-based instructional coaching of kindergarten and first grade teachers as they worked one-on-one with struggling readers. Researchers found that the struggling readers receiving TRI treatment outperformed those struggling readers in the control group on all measured outcomes (letter-word identification, word attack, comprehension), with effect sizes ranging from 0.15 to 0.26. Although both treatment conditions produced positive results, gains were stronger in the webcam version of coaching, in which webcam footage formed the basis of feedback that teachers received for 20–30 minutes every other week. Researchers in a follow-up study of the treatment teachers found that those who had participated in 2 years of implementation produced stronger gains than those with only 1 year of participation.

Most of the research in the domain of social studies consists of small-scale studies ( Crocco and Livingston, 2017 ), and the available research supplies little evidence of the relationship between PD participation and teacher learning and student outcomes. De La Paz and colleagues (2011) acknowledge that the social studies field has been slow to develop research that could credibly examine the relationships among teachers’ participation in PD, their subsequent classroom practice, and student learning (p. 497). In one effort to advance the research in this area, De La Paz and colleagues conducted a study of 5th-, 8th-, and 11th-grade teachers who had all participated in a summer workshop designed to enhance students’ experience of historical inquiry and argumentation; following the summer workshop, teachers were randomly assigned to a follow-up school-year “networking group” (with grade-level cohorts) or to a group that would teach based on the workshop experience alone. The networking group was invited to participate in seven additional PD events during the school year and also received other supports: paid time for lesson planning, opportunities to observe other teachers, and the assistance of district librarians in locating print and online resources. In their analysis, the researchers further distinguished between teachers who logged 30 or more hours in networking and other follow-up activities and those who logged fewer than 30 hours. The researchers found that teachers characterized as “high networking” more often employed classroom practices consistent with the PD, and that their students out-performed students of low-networking or no-networking teachers on Document-Based Questioning essays. The differences in student performance were especially pronounced at the 11th-grade level.

On a still larger scale, Barr and colleagues (2016) conducted an RCT of more than 100 teachers and their 9th- and 10th-grade students in 60 high schools in eight metropolitan areas of the United States to examine the impact of the program Facing History and Ourselves. Facing History provides PD to support teachers’ use of historical case studies and related instructional activities focused on engaging students in “informed civic reflection” and, more specifically, “in an examination of racism, prejudice, and antisemitism in order to promote the development of a more humane and informed citizenry” (Barr et al., 2016, p. 4, citing Facing History and Ourselves, 2012). They found that teachers receiving PD in Facing History and Ourselves reported significantly greater self-efficacy than control teachers with respect to four discipline-specific aims: promoting historical understanding, promoting tolerance and psychosocial development, promoting deliberation, and promoting student civic literacy. Further, students of the intervention teachers demonstrated stronger skills in historical thinking and greater self-reported civic efficacy and tolerance for different perspectives than students of the control teachers.

Still other research has found that PD has the potential to positively influence history teachers’ practices. Saye and colleagues have demonstrated the potential of scaffolded lesson study in increasing teachers’ content knowledge and instructional strategies in Problem-based Historical Inquiry ( Saye et al., 2017 ), and Howell and Saye (2016) found that participation in lesson study cycles can help 4th-grade teachers develop a shared professional teaching knowledge culture.

Impact of Professional Development Targeted at Increasing Teachers’ Capacity to Work with a Diverse Student Population

The section above details what is known in the field about characteristics of subject-specific PD that is associated with positive impacts on students’ learning. In light of the committee’s task, it is also critical to ask what the field knows about the impact of PD that aims squarely to support teachers to better serve an increasingly diverse student population. Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro’s (2019) recent literature review on “multicultural education professional development” is especially helpful in understanding the landscape of research in this area, including its impact on teachers and students. Parkhouse et al. defined “multicultural education” as “an overarching term for the various historical and contemporary reform efforts to create more inclusive and equitable schooling for all children” (p. 420), which includes culturally relevant pedagogy ( Ladson-Billings, 1995 ), culturally responsive teaching ( Gay, 2002 ), and culturally sustaining pedagogy ( Paris and Alim, 2017 ). There is debate in the education research community regarding the language to use to describe initiatives that are focused on furthering educational equity and justice. Scholars have identified limitations in the use

of the term “multicultural education,” suggesting that over the course of several decades, in practice, “multicultural education” has come to “mean adapting how one teaches, but not necessarily what one teaches or for what purposes” ( Sleeter, 2018 , p. 11). In what follows, we draw on the important findings offered by Parkhouse et al.’s comprehensive review; however, we refer to PD supporting teachers to work with diverse groups of students (rather than multicultural education PD) when identifying implications for the field.

In their review, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro hoped “to better understand the forms and features of [PD] programs that contribute to teachers’ self-efficacy and success in working with culturally diverse students” (p. 416). They identified 40 (of 1,602) studies, inclusive of 33 unique PD programs from the United States, as well as other countries, that met the following criteria:

(a) the study examined a PD program on one or more topics related to cultural diversity, such as intercultural competence, culturally relevant and responsive pedagogies, or [multicultural education]; (b) the study used original qualitative and/or quantitative data; (c) the PD in the study was designed for in-service teachers or other school professionals in PK12 settings; and finally, (d) the study reported the outcomes of the PD, such as its impact on participants and/or student academic performance. (p. 421)

However, upon review of these studies, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro found that the designs of the PD and of the research were both so variable that it was impossible to discern particular forms and features of PD programs that contribute to effectiveness. Even so, their review offers important insights.

Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro found that culturally responsive teaching or culturally relevant pedagogy was identified as the leading framework for most of the PD. However, they also identified what they termed as “significant inconsistencies” across programs in terms of how these frameworks were operationalized. Namely, in many cases, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro found that what was described lacked a “critical stance;” for example, there was often no mention of engaging teachers in making sense of broader structural inequities or processes of racialization in relation to culturally and linguistically non-dominant students’ schooling opportunities. Moreover, there was not necessarily evidence that such PD focused on identifying and building on students’ cultural resources in substantive ways. In fact, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro found several instances in which what was billed as culturally responsive or relevant teaching appeared to reflect generally effective teaching strategies, like “scaffolding, using a variety of formative assessments, pointing out misconceptions, and building lessons on prior learning” (p. 426).

Another set of findings regarded whether PD programs concentrated on specific groups of students; they found that about half did, “whereas the other half discussed cultural responsiveness in more general terms” (p. 425). Particular groups of students included, for example, speakers of non-dominant languages, American Indian students, and students with disabilities. In reviewing findings across the studies, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro found that teachers generally reported greater benefit from those programs that specified particular groups of students. However, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro also found that it appeared that at times specific groups of students and their cultural histories were being stereotyped through the PD. They identify this tension as critical to wrestle with in the design and enactment of PD that aims to advance educational equity and justice.

Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro also found that by and large, PD that focused on working with a diverse student population was separate from subject-matter PD. This finding fits with what teachers tended to report in nationally representative surveys, as described above. In the few cases in which the PD was tied to specific subject matter (e.g., science, math, social studies), the PD appeared to lack attention to developing a critical perspective on equity and schooling.

In terms of impacts on teachers, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro found that, on the whole, studies reported benefits to teachers’ perspectives and/or knowledge about how to support a diverse student body, mostly on the basis of self-report data derived from teacher surveys, questionnaires, or interviews. For example, teachers reported being more aware of their students’ cultural backgrounds, as well as of their own biases and their potential impact on instruction. However, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro also found that while some studies reported changes in teachers’ awareness of their students’ backgrounds, there was minimal attention to whether, and if so, how, teachers changed their practice. In fact, based on the challenges identified across the studies in changing practice, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro wrote: “These studies caution against assuming that raising awareness of diversity and inequities will naturally lead to transformed teaching practices or that teachers will develop culturally responsive lessons without specific guidance on how to connect cultural assets to their curriculum (e.g., Brown and Crippen, 2016 ; Lee et al., 2007 )” (p. 451; on this point, see also Sleeter, 1997 ).

Lee and colleagues’ (2007) study of a 2-year elementary science PD program is one of the few studies that integrated a focus on content and supporting culturally and linguistically diverse students to track changes in both teachers’ beliefs and practices. The intervention consisted of four 1-day workshops provided throughout the school year, and the provision of curriculum materials for two units that explicitly focused on attention to students’ home language and culture. The overwhelming majority of the 43 participating teachers were female; however, they were racially and

ethnically diverse. Eighteen of the teachers reported speaking English as their home language, while 13 reported Spanish, 6 reported English and Spanish, 1 reported Haitian Creole, and 5 teachers did not respond.

Lee and colleagues’ analysis of changes in beliefs and practices over the 2 years is sobering. At the start of the intervention, many teachers expressed the view that students’ home language is an important resource for instruction, and there was modest improvement in the presence of this belief at the end of year two. However, on the whole, based on quantitative coding of two video-recorded classroom observations each year of teachers’ teaching the specially designed units, researchers found that most teachers did “not use students’ home language in instruction, and [did] not allow or invite students to use their home language” (p. 1,283); there was no significant change in this over the course of the 2 years. In addition, there was no significant change in teachers’ beliefs or practices related to attending to students’ home cultures in instruction. Lee and colleagues write, “[A]lthough [teachers] emphasized the importance of incorporating students’ culture into science instruction . . ., [t]hey generally did not incorporate diverse cultural experiences or materials into their teaching” (p. 1,284). Lee and colleagues offer thoughtful reflection on the implications of their findings, including suggesting the value in connecting the 1-day workshops with ongoing support in teachers’ classrooms to modify their instruction. They suggest, more broadly, the importance of attending to how PD interfaces with other aspects of teaching and the workplace (e.g., accountability systems, expectations about treating students’ linguistic and cultural backgrounds as resources for instruction).

In their review, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro (2019) explicitly call for more coordinated research on PD programs that target teachers’ capacity to work with diverse groups of students. They write: “The studies reviewed here lack sufficient consistency across theoretical approaches, PD designs, and data collection methods to draw definitive conclusions about the characteristics of effective [multicultural education] PD” (p. 451). While recognizing the value in studying a diverse set of PD programs, Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro also caution that absent some consistency, whether it be to a specific underlying theory of action of the PD, theory of teacher learning, PD design, or research methodology, it is difficult to discern critical features of designing and implementing effective PD in this crucial area.

In addition, on the basis of their review, the authors identify several important research questions to explore. One entails investigating how PD can “both challenge teachers to reflect on inequities within education while also recognizing that some teachers may meet such discussions with defensiveness, reluctance to change, or skepticism” (p. 451). A second question concerns investigating ways to attend to the tension discussed above “between providing specific knowledge about students’ cultures—for instance,

through partnering with community members—and guarding against promoting stereotypes or broad generalizations” (p. 451). Parkhouse, Lu, and Massaro also argue for the value in investigating how to design and implement PD targeting teachers’ work with culturally diverse students that explicitly takes into account variation in teachers’ knowledge, skills, beliefs, and experience.

Teachers in the 21st century encounter an increasingly diverse population of students and escalating expectations for what those students should know and be able to do as they progress through school. The world that those teachers, students, and their families inhabit—with its rapid technological advances, environmental dilemmas, social and political disruptions, and global interconnectedness—presents both compelling new opportunities and daunting challenges. This chapter responds to those requirements by highlighting the ideas, materials, and guidance offered through structured PD.

Nationally representative surveys indicate that most teachers have access to PD related to their teaching assignment; however, teachers report having minimal opportunities to learn how to support a broader student population, including students with disabilities and students identified as English learners. PD that targets teachers’ capacity to support a diverse student population tends to remain separate from content-focused PD, even though research indicates it is important that they be integrated.

Formally structured PD, like that of preservice teacher education, presents a “sprawling landscape” of programs and an equally sprawling array of research. New forms of PD have emerged in recent years, prominently including online programs and platforms, as well as approaches such as Lesson Study that invite teachers to learn in and from their own practice. Research has yielded mixed evidence regarding the outcomes of PD with respect to gains in teacher knowledge, classroom practice, and student outcomes. However, a growing number of studies demonstrate that well-designed, content-focused PD can achieve positive outcomes, especially when the PD helps teachers integrate new ideas or strategies with curriculum and when teachers engage with others in the same grade level, department, or school. Less is known about the outcomes of PD targeted at teachers’ capacity for working with a diverse student population. Moreover, evidence of effective PD tends to come from research on small-scale interventions designed and led by experts (or in some instances, PD designed by experts and led by local facilitators trained by experts). Little is known about the quality of the PD that most teachers receive or the degree to which programs of PD prove responsive to the needs and interests arising from teachers’ main

teaching assignments and from the changing expectations they encounter. In the chapter that follows, the committee considers the learning opportunities rooted in teachers’ daily experience in the classroom and school.

Ball, D.L., and Cohen, D.K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice (pp. 3–32). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Banilower, E.R., Smith, P.S., Malzahn, K.A., Plumley, C.L., Gordon, E.M., and Hayes, M.L. (2018). Report of the 2018 NSSME+ . Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.

Barr, D., Boulay, B., Selman, R.L., McCormick, R., Lowenstein, E., Gamse, B., et al. (2015). A randomized controlled trial of professional development for interdisciplinary civic education: Impacts on humanities teachers and their students. Teachers College Record, 117 (4), 1–52.

Blank, R.K., and de las Alas, N. (2009). The Effects of Teacher Professional Development on Gains in Student Achievement: How Meta Analysis Provides Scientific Evidence Useful to Education Leaders . Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33 (8), 3–15.

Borko, H., Koellner, K., and Jacobs, J. (2011). Using video representations of teaching in practice-based professional development programs. Mathematics Education, 43 , 175–187.

Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Koellner, K. and Swackhamer, L.E. (2015). Mathematics Professional Development: Improving Teaching Using the Problem-Solving Cycle and Leadership Preparation Models . New York: Teachers College Press.

Brown, J.C., and Crippen, K.J. (2016). Designing for culturally responsive science education through professional development. International Journal of Science Education, 38 , 470–492.

Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., and Easton, J.Q. (2010). Organizing Schools for Improvement . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cobb, P., Jackson, K., Henrick, E., Smith, T., and MIST team. (2018). Systems for Instructional Improvement: Creating Coherence from the Classroom to the District Office . Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Coburn, C.E., and Russell, J.L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30 (3), 203–235.

Crocco, M.S., and Livingston, E. (2017). Becoming an “expert” social studies teacher: What we know about teacher education and professional development. In M.M. Manfra and C.M. Bolick (Eds.), The Wiley Handbook of Social Studies Research (pp. 360–384). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Dede, C., Ketelhut, D.J., Whitehouse, P.L., Breit, L.A., and McCloskey, E.M. (2009). A research agenda for online teacher professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60 (1), 8–19.

De La Paz, S., Malkus, N., Monte-Sano, C., and Montanaro, E. (2011). Evaluating American history teachers’ professional development: Effects on student learning. Theory & Research in Social Education, 39 , 494–540.

DeMonte, J. (2013). High-Quality Professional Development for Teachers: Supporting Teacher Training to Improve Student Learning . Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.

Desimone, L.M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38 , 181–199.

Dieker, L.A., Rodriguez, J.A., Lignugaris/Kraft, B., Hynes, M.C., and Hughes, C.E. (2014). The potential of simulated environments in teacher education: Current and future possibilities. Teacher Education and Special Education , 37 (1), 21–33.

Fernandez, C. (2002). Learning from Japanese approaches to professional development: The case of lesson study. Journal of Teacher Education, 53 (5), 393–405.

Fernandez, C. (2005). Lesson Study: A means for elementary teachers to develop the knowledge of mathematics needed for reform-minded teaching? Mathematical Thinking and Learning 7 (4), 265–289.

Fishman, B., Konstantopoulos, S., Kubitskey, B.W., Vath, R., Park, G., Johnson, H., and Edelson, D.C. (2013). Comparing the impact of online and face-to-face professional development in the context of curriculum implementation. Journal of Teacher Education , 64(5), 426–438.

Gallagher, H.A., Arshan, N., and Woodworth, K. (2017). Impact of the National Writing Project’s College-Ready Writers Program in High-Need Rural Districts. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10 (3), 570–595.

Garet, M.S., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., Uekawa, K., Falk, A., Bloom, H., Doolittle, F., Zhu, P., and Sztejnberg, L. (2008). The Impact of Two Professional Development Interventions on Early Reading Instruction and Achievement. (NCEE 2008–4030) . Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Garet, M., Wayne, A., Stancavage, F., Taylor, J., Walters, K., Song, M., Brown, S., Hurlburt, S., Zhu, P., Sepanik, S., and Doolittle, F. (2010). Middle School Mathematics Professional Development Impact Study: Findings after the First Year of Implementation. (NCEE 2010–4009). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53 , 106–116.

Gersten, R., Taylor, M.J., Keys, T.D., Rolfhus, E., and Newman-Gonchar, R. (2014). Summary of Research on the Effectiveness of Math Professional Development Approaches . Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Grigg, J., Kelly, K.A., Gamoran, A., and Borman, G.D. (2013). Effects of two scientific inquiry professional development interventions on teaching practice. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35 (1), 38–56.

Heller, J.I., Daehler, K.R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., and Miratrix, L. (2012). Differential effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (3), 333–362.

Howell, J., and Saye, J. (2016). Using lesson study to develop a shared professional teaching knowledge culture among 4th grade social studies teachers. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 40 (1), 25–37.

Kazemi, E., and Franke, M.L. (2004). Teacher learning in mathematics: Using student work to promote collective inquiry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 7 (3), 203–235.

Kennedy, M.M. (1999). Form and Substance in In-service Teacher Education. (Research Monograph No. 13). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Kennedy, M.M. (2016). How does professional development improve teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86 (4), 945–980.

Ladson-Billings, G.J. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Education Research Journal , 35 , 465–491.

Lee, O., Luykx, A., Buxton, C., and Shaver, A. (2007). The challenge of altering elementary school teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding linguistic and cultural diversity in science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 , 1269–1291.

Lewis, C. (2009). What is the nature of knowledge development in lesson study? Educational Action Research, 17 (1), 95–110.

Lewis, C., and Perry, R. (2017). Lesson study to scale up research-based knowledge: A randomized, controlled study of fractions learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48 (3), 261–299.

Lewis, C., Perry, R., and Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35 (3), 3–14.

Little, J.W. (1989). District policy choices and local professional development opportunities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11 (2), 165–179.

Gallagher, H.A., Arshan, N., and Woodworth, K. (2017). Impact of the National Writing Project’s College-Ready Writers Program in high-need rural districts. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10 (3), 570–595.

Luna, M.J., and Sherin, M.G. (2017). Using a video club design to promote teacher attention to students’ ideas in science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66 , 282–294.

Lynch, K., Hill, H.C., Gonzalez, K., and Pollard, C. (2019). Strengthening the research base that informs STEM instructional improvement efforts: A meta-analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 41 (3), 260–293.

McLaughlin, M.W., and Talbert, J.E. (2001). Professional Communities and the Work of High School Teaching . Chicago: Chicago University Press.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2015). Science Teachers’ Learning: Enhancing Opportunities, Creating Supportive Contexts . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School Teachers in the United States: Results from the 2015–2016 National Teacher and Principal Survey First Look . Washington, DC: Author.

National Education Association. (1987). The Status of the American Teacher 1985 – 1986. Washington, DC: Author.

Odden, A., Archibald, S., Fermanich, M., and Gallagher, H.A. (2002). A cost framework for professional development. Journal of Education Finance, 28 (Summer), 51–74.

Olson, C.B., Kim, J.S., Scarcella, R., Kramer, J., Pearson, M., van Dyk, D.A., Collins, P., and Land, R.E. (2012). Enhancing the interpretive reading and analytic writing of mainstreamed English learners in secondary school: Results from a randomized field trial using a cognitive strategies approach. American Educational Research Journal, 49 (2), 323–355.

Osborne, J.F., Borko, H., Fishman, E., Zaccarelli, F.G., Berson, E., Busch, K.C., et al. (2019). Impacts of a practice-based professional development program on elementary teachers’ facilitation of and student engagement with scientific argumentation. American Educational Research Journal, 56 (4), 1067–1112.

Paris, D., and Alim, H.S. (2017). Culturally Sustaining Pedagogies: Teaching and Learning for Justice in a Changing World . New York: Teachers College Press.

Parkhouse, H., Lu, C.Y., and Massaro, V. (2019). Multicultural education professional development: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research , 89 (3), 416–458.

Parsad, B., Lewis, L., Farris, E., and Greene, B. (2001). Teacher Preparation and Professional Development: 2000 . Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Polly, D., McGee, J., Wang, C., Martin, C., Lambert, R., and Pugalee, D. (2015). Linking professional development, teacher outcomes, and student achievement: The case of a learner-centered mathematics program for elementary school teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 72 , 26–37.

Rice, J.K. (2001). Cost Framework for Teacher Preparation and Professional Development . New York: Finance Project.

Rodman, A. (2019). Personalized Professional Learning: A Job-Embedded Pathway for Elevating Teacher Voice . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Rotermund, S., DeRoche, J., and Ottem, R. (2017) Teacher Professional Development by Selected Teacher and School Characteristics: 2011–2102 . Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Roth, K.J., Garnier, H.E., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., and Wickler N.I.Z. (2011) Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (2), 117–148.

Santagata, R. (2009). Designing video-based professional development for mathematics teachers in low-performing schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 60 (1), 38–51.

Saye, J.W., Kohlmeier, J., Howell, J.B., McCormick, T.M., Jones, R.C., and Brush, T.A. (2017). Scaffolded lesson study: Promoting professional teaching knowledge for problem-based historical Inquiry. Social Studies Research and Practice, 12 (1), 95–112.

Scher, L., and O’Reilly, F. (2009). Professional development for K–12 math and science teachers: What do we really know? Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2 (3), 209–249.

Seago, N. (2004). Using video as an object of inquiry for mathematics teaching and learning. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Using Video in Teacher Education (pp. 259–286). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Sherin, M.G., and Han, S.Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20 (2), 163–183.

Slavin, R.E., Lake, C., Hanley, P., and Thurston, A. (2014). Experimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 51 (7), 870–901.

Sleeter, C.E. (1997). Mathematics, multicultural education, and professional development. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (6), 680–696.

Sleeter, C.E. (2018). Multicultural education past, present, and future: Struggles for dialog and power-sharing. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 20 (1), 5–20.

Stigler, J.W., and Hiebert, J. (1999). The Teaching Gap: Best Ideas from the World’s Teachers for Improving Education in the Classroom . New York: Summit Books.

The New Teacher Project. (2015). The Mirage: Confronting the Hard Truth about Our Quest for Teacher Development . New York: Author.

van Es, E.A., Tunney, J., Goldsmith, L.T., and Seago, N. (2014). A framework for the facilitation of teachers’ analysis of video. Journal of Teacher Education, 65 (4), 340–356.

van Es, E.A., Tekkumru-Kisa, M., and Seago, N. (in press). Leveraging the power of video for teacher learning: A design framework for teacher educators. In S. Llinares and O. Chapman (Eds.), International Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education (Vol. 2). Boston, MA: Brill.

Vernon-Feagans, L., Bratsch-Hines, M., Varghese, C., Bean, A., and Hedrick, A. (2015). The targeted reading intervention: Face-to-face vs. webcam literacy coaching of classroom teachers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 30 (3).

Wei, R.C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., and Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional Learning in the Learning Profession: A Status Report on Teacher Development in the United States and Abroad . Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council.

Wilson, S.M., and Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24 , 173–209.

Yoon, K.S., Duncan, T., Lee, S.W.Y., Scarloss, B., and Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the Evidence on How Teacher Professional Development Affects Student Achievement (Issues and Answers Report, REL 2007-No. 033). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southwest, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary science as argument. Science Education, 93 (4), 687–719.

Teachers play a critical role in the success of their students, both academically and in regard to long term outcomes such as higher education participation and economic attainment. Expectations for teachers are increasing due to changing learning standards and a rapidly diversifying student population. At the same time, there are perceptions that the teaching workforce may be shifting toward a younger and less experienced demographic. These actual and perceived changes raise important questions about the ways teacher education may need to evolve in order to ensure that educators are able to meet the needs of students and provide them with classroom experiences that will put them on the path to future success.

Changing Expectations for the K-12 Teacher Workforce: Policies, Preservice Education, Professional Development, and the Workplace explores the impact of the changing landscape of K-12 education and the potential for expansion of effective models, programs, and practices for teacher education. This report explores factors that contribute to understanding the current teacher workforce, changing expectations for teaching and learning, trends and developments in the teacher labor market, preservice teacher education, and opportunities for learning in the workplace and in-service professional development.

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

A generative AI reset: Rewiring to turn potential into value in 2024

It’s time for a generative AI (gen AI) reset. The initial enthusiasm and flurry of activity in 2023 is giving way to second thoughts and recalibrations as companies realize that capturing gen AI’s enormous potential value is harder than expected .

With 2024 shaping up to be the year for gen AI to prove its value, companies should keep in mind the hard lessons learned with digital and AI transformations: competitive advantage comes from building organizational and technological capabilities to broadly innovate, deploy, and improve solutions at scale—in effect, rewiring the business for distributed digital and AI innovation.

About QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey

QuantumBlack, McKinsey’s AI arm, helps companies transform using the power of technology, technical expertise, and industry experts. With thousands of practitioners at QuantumBlack (data engineers, data scientists, product managers, designers, and software engineers) and McKinsey (industry and domain experts), we are working to solve the world’s most important AI challenges. QuantumBlack Labs is our center of technology development and client innovation, which has been driving cutting-edge advancements and developments in AI through locations across the globe.

Companies looking to score early wins with gen AI should move quickly. But those hoping that gen AI offers a shortcut past the tough—and necessary—organizational surgery are likely to meet with disappointing results. Launching pilots is (relatively) easy; getting pilots to scale and create meaningful value is hard because they require a broad set of changes to the way work actually gets done.

Let’s briefly look at what this has meant for one Pacific region telecommunications company. The company hired a chief data and AI officer with a mandate to “enable the organization to create value with data and AI.” The chief data and AI officer worked with the business to develop the strategic vision and implement the road map for the use cases. After a scan of domains (that is, customer journeys or functions) and use case opportunities across the enterprise, leadership prioritized the home-servicing/maintenance domain to pilot and then scale as part of a larger sequencing of initiatives. They targeted, in particular, the development of a gen AI tool to help dispatchers and service operators better predict the types of calls and parts needed when servicing homes.

Leadership put in place cross-functional product teams with shared objectives and incentives to build the gen AI tool. As part of an effort to upskill the entire enterprise to better work with data and gen AI tools, they also set up a data and AI academy, which the dispatchers and service operators enrolled in as part of their training. To provide the technology and data underpinnings for gen AI, the chief data and AI officer also selected a large language model (LLM) and cloud provider that could meet the needs of the domain as well as serve other parts of the enterprise. The chief data and AI officer also oversaw the implementation of a data architecture so that the clean and reliable data (including service histories and inventory databases) needed to build the gen AI tool could be delivered quickly and responsibly.

Creating value beyond the hype

Let’s deliver on the promise of technology from strategy to scale.

Our book Rewired: The McKinsey Guide to Outcompeting in the Age of Digital and AI (Wiley, June 2023) provides a detailed manual on the six capabilities needed to deliver the kind of broad change that harnesses digital and AI technology. In this article, we will explore how to extend each of those capabilities to implement a successful gen AI program at scale. While recognizing that these are still early days and that there is much more to learn, our experience has shown that breaking open the gen AI opportunity requires companies to rewire how they work in the following ways.

Figure out where gen AI copilots can give you a real competitive advantage

The broad excitement around gen AI and its relative ease of use has led to a burst of experimentation across organizations. Most of these initiatives, however, won’t generate a competitive advantage. One bank, for example, bought tens of thousands of GitHub Copilot licenses, but since it didn’t have a clear sense of how to work with the technology, progress was slow. Another unfocused effort we often see is when companies move to incorporate gen AI into their customer service capabilities. Customer service is a commodity capability, not part of the core business, for most companies. While gen AI might help with productivity in such cases, it won’t create a competitive advantage.

To create competitive advantage, companies should first understand the difference between being a “taker” (a user of available tools, often via APIs and subscription services), a “shaper” (an integrator of available models with proprietary data), and a “maker” (a builder of LLMs). For now, the maker approach is too expensive for most companies, so the sweet spot for businesses is implementing a taker model for productivity improvements while building shaper applications for competitive advantage.

Much of gen AI’s near-term value is closely tied to its ability to help people do their current jobs better. In this way, gen AI tools act as copilots that work side by side with an employee, creating an initial block of code that a developer can adapt, for example, or drafting a requisition order for a new part that a maintenance worker in the field can review and submit (see sidebar “Copilot examples across three generative AI archetypes”). This means companies should be focusing on where copilot technology can have the biggest impact on their priority programs.

Copilot examples across three generative AI archetypes

“Taker” copilots help real estate customers sift through property options and find the most promising one, write code for a developer, and summarize investor transcripts.
“Shaper” copilots provide recommendations to sales reps for upselling customers by connecting generative AI tools to customer relationship management systems, financial systems, and customer behavior histories; create virtual assistants to personalize treatments for patients; and recommend solutions for maintenance workers based on historical data.
“Maker” copilots are foundation models that lab scientists at pharmaceutical companies can use to find and test new and better drugs more quickly.

Some industrial companies, for example, have identified maintenance as a critical domain for their business. Reviewing maintenance reports and spending time with workers on the front lines can help determine where a gen AI copilot could make a big difference, such as in identifying issues with equipment failures quickly and early on. A gen AI copilot can also help identify root causes of truck breakdowns and recommend resolutions much more quickly than usual, as well as act as an ongoing source for best practices or standard operating procedures.

The challenge with copilots is figuring out how to generate revenue from increased productivity. In the case of customer service centers, for example, companies can stop recruiting new agents and use attrition to potentially achieve real financial gains. Defining the plans for how to generate revenue from the increased productivity up front, therefore, is crucial to capturing the value.

McKinsey Live Event: Unlocking the full value of gen AI

Join our colleagues Jessica Lamb and Gayatri Shenai on April 8, as they discuss how companies can navigate the ever-changing world of gen AI.

Upskill the talent you have but be clear about the gen-AI-specific skills you need

By now, most companies have a decent understanding of the technical gen AI skills they need, such as model fine-tuning, vector database administration, prompt engineering, and context engineering. In many cases, these are skills that you can train your existing workforce to develop. Those with existing AI and machine learning (ML) capabilities have a strong head start. Data engineers, for example, can learn multimodal processing and vector database management, MLOps (ML operations) engineers can extend their skills to LLMOps (LLM operations), and data scientists can develop prompt engineering, bias detection, and fine-tuning skills.

A sample of new generative AI skills needed

The following are examples of new skills needed for the successful deployment of generative AI tools:

data scientist:
prompt engineering
in-context learning
bias detection
pattern identification
reinforcement learning from human feedback
hyperparameter/large language model fine-tuning; transfer learning
data engineer:
data wrangling and data warehousing
data pipeline construction
multimodal processing
vector database management

The learning process can take two to three months to get to a decent level of competence because of the complexities in learning what various LLMs can and can’t do and how best to use them. The coders need to gain experience building software, testing, and validating answers, for example. It took one financial-services company three months to train its best data scientists to a high level of competence. While courses and documentation are available—many LLM providers have boot camps for developers—we have found that the most effective way to build capabilities at scale is through apprenticeship, training people to then train others, and building communities of practitioners. Rotating experts through teams to train others, scheduling regular sessions for people to share learnings, and hosting biweekly documentation review sessions are practices that have proven successful in building communities of practitioners (see sidebar “A sample of new generative AI skills needed”).

It’s important to bear in mind that successful gen AI skills are about more than coding proficiency. Our experience in developing our own gen AI platform, Lilli , showed us that the best gen AI technical talent has design skills to uncover where to focus solutions, contextual understanding to ensure the most relevant and high-quality answers are generated, collaboration skills to work well with knowledge experts (to test and validate answers and develop an appropriate curation approach), strong forensic skills to figure out causes of breakdowns (is the issue the data, the interpretation of the user’s intent, the quality of metadata on embeddings, or something else?), and anticipation skills to conceive of and plan for possible outcomes and to put the right kind of tracking into their code. A pure coder who doesn’t intrinsically have these skills may not be as useful a team member.

While current upskilling is largely based on a “learn on the job” approach, we see a rapid market emerging for people who have learned these skills over the past year. That skill growth is moving quickly. GitHub reported that developers were working on gen AI projects “in big numbers,” and that 65,000 public gen AI projects were created on its platform in 2023—a jump of almost 250 percent over the previous year. If your company is just starting its gen AI journey, you could consider hiring two or three senior engineers who have built a gen AI shaper product for their companies. This could greatly accelerate your efforts.

Form a centralized team to establish standards that enable responsible scaling

To ensure that all parts of the business can scale gen AI capabilities, centralizing competencies is a natural first move. The critical focus for this central team will be to develop and put in place protocols and standards to support scale, ensuring that teams can access models while also minimizing risk and containing costs. The team’s work could include, for example, procuring models and prescribing ways to access them, developing standards for data readiness, setting up approved prompt libraries, and allocating resources.

While developing Lilli, our team had its mind on scale when it created an open plug-in architecture and setting standards for how APIs should function and be built. They developed standardized tooling and infrastructure where teams could securely experiment and access a GPT LLM , a gateway with preapproved APIs that teams could access, and a self-serve developer portal. Our goal is that this approach, over time, can help shift “Lilli as a product” (that a handful of teams use to build specific solutions) to “Lilli as a platform” (that teams across the enterprise can access to build other products).

For teams developing gen AI solutions, squad composition will be similar to AI teams but with data engineers and data scientists with gen AI experience and more contributors from risk management, compliance, and legal functions. The general idea of staffing squads with resources that are federated from the different expertise areas will not change, but the skill composition of a gen-AI-intensive squad will.

Set up the technology architecture to scale

Building a gen AI model is often relatively straightforward, but making it fully operational at scale is a different matter entirely. We’ve seen engineers build a basic chatbot in a week, but releasing a stable, accurate, and compliant version that scales can take four months. That’s why, our experience shows, the actual model costs may be less than 10 to 15 percent of the total costs of the solution.

Building for scale doesn’t mean building a new technology architecture. But it does mean focusing on a few core decisions that simplify and speed up processes without breaking the bank. Three such decisions stand out:

Focus on reusing your technology. Reusing code can increase the development speed of gen AI use cases by 30 to 50 percent. One good approach is simply creating a source for approved tools, code, and components. A financial-services company, for example, created a library of production-grade tools, which had been approved by both the security and legal teams, and made them available in a library for teams to use. More important is taking the time to identify and build those capabilities that are common across the most priority use cases. The same financial-services company, for example, identified three components that could be reused for more than 100 identified use cases. By building those first, they were able to generate a significant portion of the code base for all the identified use cases—essentially giving every application a big head start.
Focus the architecture on enabling efficient connections between gen AI models and internal systems. For gen AI models to work effectively in the shaper archetype, they need access to a business’s data and applications. Advances in integration and orchestration frameworks have significantly reduced the effort required to make those connections. But laying out what those integrations are and how to enable them is critical to ensure these models work efficiently and to avoid the complexity that creates technical debt (the “tax” a company pays in terms of time and resources needed to redress existing technology issues). Chief information officers and chief technology officers can define reference architectures and integration standards for their organizations. Key elements should include a model hub, which contains trained and approved models that can be provisioned on demand; standard APIs that act as bridges connecting gen AI models to applications or data; and context management and caching, which speed up processing by providing models with relevant information from enterprise data sources.
Build up your testing and quality assurance capabilities. Our own experience building Lilli taught us to prioritize testing over development. Our team invested in not only developing testing protocols for each stage of development but also aligning the entire team so that, for example, it was clear who specifically needed to sign off on each stage of the process. This slowed down initial development but sped up the overall delivery pace and quality by cutting back on errors and the time needed to fix mistakes.

Ensure data quality and focus on unstructured data to fuel your models

The ability of a business to generate and scale value from gen AI models will depend on how well it takes advantage of its own data. As with technology, targeted upgrades to existing data architecture are needed to maximize the future strategic benefits of gen AI:

Be targeted in ramping up your data quality and data augmentation efforts. While data quality has always been an important issue, the scale and scope of data that gen AI models can use—especially unstructured data—has made this issue much more consequential. For this reason, it’s critical to get the data foundations right, from clarifying decision rights to defining clear data processes to establishing taxonomies so models can access the data they need. The companies that do this well tie their data quality and augmentation efforts to the specific AI/gen AI application and use case—you don’t need this data foundation to extend to every corner of the enterprise. This could mean, for example, developing a new data repository for all equipment specifications and reported issues to better support maintenance copilot applications.
Understand what value is locked into your unstructured data. Most organizations have traditionally focused their data efforts on structured data (values that can be organized in tables, such as prices and features). But the real value from LLMs comes from their ability to work with unstructured data (for example, PowerPoint slides, videos, and text). Companies can map out which unstructured data sources are most valuable and establish metadata tagging standards so models can process the data and teams can find what they need (tagging is particularly important to help companies remove data from models as well, if necessary). Be creative in thinking about data opportunities. Some companies, for example, are interviewing senior employees as they retire and feeding that captured institutional knowledge into an LLM to help improve their copilot performance.
Optimize to lower costs at scale. There is often as much as a tenfold difference between what companies pay for data and what they could be paying if they optimized their data infrastructure and underlying costs. This issue often stems from companies scaling their proofs of concept without optimizing their data approach. Two costs generally stand out. One is storage costs arising from companies uploading terabytes of data into the cloud and wanting that data available 24/7. In practice, companies rarely need more than 10 percent of their data to have that level of availability, and accessing the rest over a 24- or 48-hour period is a much cheaper option. The other costs relate to computation with models that require on-call access to thousands of processors to run. This is especially the case when companies are building their own models (the maker archetype) but also when they are using pretrained models and running them with their own data and use cases (the shaper archetype). Companies could take a close look at how they can optimize computation costs on cloud platforms—for instance, putting some models in a queue to run when processors aren’t being used (such as when Americans go to bed and consumption of computing services like Netflix decreases) is a much cheaper option.

Build trust and reusability to drive adoption and scale

Because many people have concerns about gen AI, the bar on explaining how these tools work is much higher than for most solutions. People who use the tools want to know how they work, not just what they do. So it’s important to invest extra time and money to build trust by ensuring model accuracy and making it easy to check answers.

One insurance company, for example, created a gen AI tool to help manage claims. As part of the tool, it listed all the guardrails that had been put in place, and for each answer provided a link to the sentence or page of the relevant policy documents. The company also used an LLM to generate many variations of the same question to ensure answer consistency. These steps, among others, were critical to helping end users build trust in the tool.

Part of the training for maintenance teams using a gen AI tool should be to help them understand the limitations of models and how best to get the right answers. That includes teaching workers strategies to get to the best answer as fast as possible by starting with broad questions then narrowing them down. This provides the model with more context, and it also helps remove any bias of the people who might think they know the answer already. Having model interfaces that look and feel the same as existing tools also helps users feel less pressured to learn something new each time a new application is introduced.

Getting to scale means that businesses will need to stop building one-off solutions that are hard to use for other similar use cases. One global energy and materials company, for example, has established ease of reuse as a key requirement for all gen AI models, and has found in early iterations that 50 to 60 percent of its components can be reused. This means setting standards for developing gen AI assets (for example, prompts and context) that can be easily reused for other cases.

While many of the risk issues relating to gen AI are evolutions of discussions that were already brewing—for instance, data privacy, security, bias risk, job displacement, and intellectual property protection—gen AI has greatly expanded that risk landscape. Just 21 percent of companies reporting AI adoption say they have established policies governing employees’ use of gen AI technologies.

Similarly, a set of tests for AI/gen AI solutions should be established to demonstrate that data privacy, debiasing, and intellectual property protection are respected. Some organizations, in fact, are proposing to release models accompanied with documentation that details their performance characteristics. Documenting your decisions and rationales can be particularly helpful in conversations with regulators.

In some ways, this article is premature—so much is changing that we’ll likely have a profoundly different understanding of gen AI and its capabilities in a year’s time. But the core truths of finding value and driving change will still apply. How well companies have learned those lessons may largely determine how successful they’ll be in capturing that value.

The authors wish to thank Michael Chui, Juan Couto, Ben Ellencweig, Josh Gartner, Bryce Hall, Holger Harreis, Phil Hudelson, Suzana Iacob, Sid Kamath, Neerav Kingsland, Kitti Lakner, Robert Levin, Matej Macak, Lapo Mori, Alex Peluffo, Aldo Rosales, Erik Roth, Abdul Wahab Shaikh, and Stephen Xu for their contributions to this article.

This article was edited by Barr Seitz, an editorial director in the New York office.

Explore a career with us

The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier

Rewired to outcompete

A digital construction of a human face consisting of blocks

Meet Lilli, our generative AI tool that’s a researcher, a time saver, and an inspiration

IMAGES

PPT
(PPT) Inservice education
PPT
PPT
PPT
PPT

VIDEO

LIFEPAK 15 INSERVICE VTS 02 2
LIFEPAK 15 INSERVICE VTS 01 0
PowerPoint Presentation
Learn PowerPoint on HOLI Festival
Basic PowerPoint presentation Video
How to make your presentations exciting #presentation #powerpoint #microsoft #education

COMMENTS

PPT
In service education is defined as a continued programme of education provided by the employing authority, with the purpose of developing the competences of personnel in their functions appropriate to the position they hold, or to which they will be appointed in the service. • 2. In-service education is a planned instructional or training ...
Inservice Education
Inservice Education. Ppt - Free download as Powerpoint Presentation (.ppt / .pptx), PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online. Scribd is the world's largest social reading and publishing site.
(PPT) Inservice education
presented by Uma gupta B.N 2nd year At the end of the education progamme learners should be able to define inservice education,its purpose,planing,implementation and evaluation. 1. Definition 2. Purposes 3. Planning 4. Implementation 5. evaluation In-service education is an organized educational programme,which is offered to train staff during ...
Inservice Education: Ten Principles
Because participating in inservice education is a form of professional service to teachers' schools and students, districts must endorse teach-ers' continuing efforts to be involved in such education. Because through inservice education teachers are more likely to grow professionally, such participation must be recognized and supported.
PDF In-Service Education of Teachers: Overview, Problems and the Way Forward
The need for in-service education of teachers cannot be underestimated. It is a necessity in enhancing work performance and motivation of teachers in the field. Absence of in-service training of teachers will retard professional growth of teachers as well as "missing gaps" between demands and actual achievement levels.
Inservice Teacher Education
Introduction. Inservice teacher education is broadly defined as any learning opportunity for practicing teachers. The term inservice teacher designates a teacher that has certification or is already teaching in a classroom, in contrast to a preservice teacher, who is in the process of preparing to become a teacher.Preservice and inservice teacher learning have changed over time.
Inservice and Continuing Education
Inservice Education . It is recognized that educational activities play an important role in marketing, establishing loyalty and enhancing company image. To that end, education programs have been developed for presentation to your nurse and allied health clients. It is important that you recognize your educational activities as value-added service.
A Guide for the Development of an Inservice Education Program
This document suggests several things: a process for developing an inservice education program; suggested definition, philosophy, and objectives of inservice education; guidelines to assist in developing and maintaining an effective inservice education program; and a four-step job instructor training method which involves consecutively preparing the worker for training, presenting the job to ...
PPT
Distance Education program • The Distance Education program for in-service teacher is a Bachelor of Education degree in pry education. • The course is based on internal B.ed (pry) program. It is a five year program. • It was started in December 1995 and the first batch of candidate passed out in 2003.
In-Service Education: Evolving Internationally to Meet Nurses' Lifelong
In-service education (ISE) in nursing is teaching that occurs in the workplace. ... Inservice staff education. American Journal of Nursing, 50, 706-708. > Medline Google Scholar; United Kingdom Central Council. (1990). Executive summary of the report on the post-registration education and practice project. London ...
CHAPTER 15
1. INTRODUCTION. In-service education is a type of education that is provided to the employees while they are on the job so as to improve their working capacity and efficiency. The concept of in-service education is in budding form in India, whereas in western countries it has grown fully and has become an essential requirement of professional ...
6 Opportunities for Learning Through Inservice Professional Development
International Journal of Multicultural Education, 20(1), 5-20. Stigler, J.W., and Hiebert, J. (1999). The Teaching Gap: Best Ideas from the World's Teachers for Improving Education in the Classroom. New York: Summit Books. The New Teacher Project. (2015). The Mirage: Confronting the Hard Truth about Our Quest for Teacher Development. New ...
A generative AI reset: Rewiring to turn potential into value in 2024
It's time for a generative AI (gen AI) reset. The initial enthusiasm and flurry of activity in 2023 is giving way to second thoughts and recalibrations as companies realize that capturing gen AI's enormous potential value is harder than expected.. With 2024 shaping up to be the year for gen AI to prove its value, companies should keep in mind the hard lessons learned with digital and AI ...