Several years ago, I participated in a small segment of a synergistic and comprehensive approach to learning based on brain research. By using visual, auditory and kinesthetic learning strategies, the program incorporated music, color and movement to aid in retention. We were reminded that students are able to connect to their learning when it is fun, interactive, and engaging. That day, as a student, I too, connected with my learning.

I soon discovered that several teachers from my campus had participated in up to 30 hours of the snippet I participated in earlier that week. Yet, as I visited their classrooms, I saw only a few that chose to influence and enhance the mood of the classroom with the use of lighting or soothing, yet, energizing music. Sprinkled across the walls of only a few of those same classrooms, I saw visual displays including anchor charts and word walls aimed at reaching visual learners. Only occasionally did I hear key learning phrases used to capture auditory learners. I was stunned. How could such a powerful professional learning experience fail to translate on a larger scale into action for teachers on my campus?

As a campus-level administrator, I expected to see evidence of professional learning. I yearned to see classrooms where professional learning sprouted feet and walked back into the classroom with the teacher in tow. However, I seldom saw full implementation that extended over a significant period of time. Don’t get me wrong. I saw glimpses of fabulous, full-fledge implementation. I saw teachers passionate about providing dynamic research-based instruction to their students. Yet, I became keenly aware that the “knowing-doing gap” is alive and well in today’s classrooms.

The unwavering truth is that we are often rich in professional learning opportunities, yet poor in implementation.  The extent to which teachers are actually using these practices in their classrooms is a great frustration for many school leaders and classroom educators. Quite simply, it is the difference between what we know in theory and what we do in practice. Reeves points out that effective PD “is intensive and sustained, it is directly relevant to the needs of teachers and students, and it provides opportunities for application, practice, reflection, and reinforcement” (2010). Knowing that to be true, then what can we learn from those who are able to progressively narrow the “knowing-doing gap?”

Recently, I visited one campus where the level of implementation was noticeably deeper than most. I saw signs that they were steadily narrowing the “knowing-doing gap.”  Over the seven year history of the campus, most of the staff has participated in 30 hours of the synergistic and comprehensive PD I mentioned earlier. According to the campus principal, out of those trained, nearly 85% actively implement the strategies and techniques they learned along the way. As I moved from classroom to classroom, I began to see glimpses of how this was possible.

For the past couple of years, just prior to teachers returning from summer vacation, the principal invites staff members to join in on an “implementation day.” Teachers are able to earn PD hours as they “work on the work” of creating an inviting, synergistic classroom environment. On the day of my visit, the group was hosting an “open house” that occurred following the “implementation day.” Small groups of teachers buzzed briskly from classroom to classroom observing what each teacher was able to accomplish during their “implementation day.” Group members left a trail of post-it notes noting what each appreciated about the classroom environment their fellow cohort members had worked to create. I found myself wanting to linger inside of each classroom anticipating the learning that would soon unfold.

Much like what Reeves stated teachers were able to apply, practice, reflect upon, and reinforce their own professional learning. The group, although guided by the principal’s vision, clearly led and reinforced their learning. The tradition of an “implementation day” on this campus stood as a reminder that all were a part of a community of educators with a common, sustained focus on creating classroom environments that invited learners and learning. And, as I soon discovered, that was only the beginning of a trail of established traditions including infusing each faculty meeting with strategies from the training, as well as follow up PD sessions sprinkled throughout the school year. Not only did I see evidence of PD sprouting feet and walking into the classroom, I also saw a concerted effort to not leave this learning passively sitting by the wayside. Now, that is powerful PD in practice!

If the purpose of professional learning is for educators to develop the knowledge, skills, practices, and dispositions they need to help students perform at higher levels, then how can we as instructional leaders assure deepened levels of implementation? What works? What doesn’t work? Why do some succeed in effectively implementing what is learned in a professional learning setting? Why do the efforts of others fail? Who are the difference makers and what are their first steps in implementation? What are their next steps?

Over the course of this school year, by focusing on people and practices rather than programs, I will share with the reader practical mechanisms for turning professional learning into increased educator effectiveness, as well as enhanced student learning results – an aim I am certain many of you have set.

Resource:
Reeves, D. (2010). Transforming professional development into student success. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Dr. Glenda Horner is the Coordinator for Staff Development in the Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District in Houston, Texas.  To learn more about ASCD’s On-Site Capacity Building Services, go to www.ascd.org/oscb .