INFORMATION TO USERS Hus was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at file upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Miax5nlms International 300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR. Ml 4 8 10 6 18 BEDFORD ROW. LONDON WC1R 4 E J, ENGLAND 8013776 M orris,C ecilia M a e A STUDY OF THE STATUS OF MICHIGAN’S CURRENT K-12 TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EVALUATION RESEARCH THEORY Michigan State University University Microfilms International PH.D. 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 1979 18 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4EJ, England Copyright 1979 by Morris, Cecilia Mae All Rights Reserved / . 1f'•<»/'> ■* - "* ^ < t < PLEASE NOTE: In a l l cases th is m aterial has been filmed 1n the b e st possible way from the a v a ila b le copy. Problems encountered with th is document have been Id e n tifie d here with a check mark v0* . 1. Glossy photographs 2. Colored I llu s tr a tio n s 3. Photographs with dark background ‘4. I llu s tr a tio n s are poor co p y ____ 5. °r1 n t shows through as th ere 1s te x t on both sides o f page 6. I n d is tin c t, broken o r small p r in t on several pages 7. T ightly bound copy with p r in t lo s t 1n spine 8. Computer p rin to u t pages with In d is tin c t p r in t 9. Page(s) lacking when m aterial received, and not a v a ila b le from school or author ________ ^ 10. P a g e (s )________ seem to be missing in numbering only as te x t f o llo w s ________ 11. Poor carbon copy ________ 12. Not o rig in al copy, several pages with blurred type 13. Appendix pages are poor copy 14. O riginal 15. S copy with lig h t type _ _ _ Curling and wrinkled pages _ _ _ _ _ _ 16. Other Universe M ibd nim s international 300 N ZSSS RD.. ANN AR90R Ml 48106 *313) 761-4700 throughout A STUDY OF THE STATUS OF MICHIGAN'S CURRENT K-12 TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EVALUATION RESEARCH THEORY By Cecilia Morris A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Curriculum and Instruction 1979 © COPYRIGHT BY CECILIA MORRIS 1979 ABSTRACT A STUDY OF THE STATUS OF MICHIGAN’S CURRENT K-12 TpACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF EVALUATION RESEARCH THEORY By Cecilia Morris The purpose of this study was to collect, on a state wide, sys­ tematic basis, information that contributes to policy decision makers’ understanding of the current professional development system. Two com­ ponents of the teacher professional development system were investigated: the service providers and service recipients. Service providers were studied in respect to the availability and distribution of their services and also in respect to the nature of the services provided. The service recipients were investigated in regard to their perceived needs and receptivity to professional development. Two groups of Michigan teachers were randomly sampled for this study. The first group was all K-12 teachers in the Detroit School District. The other group consisted of all the other K-12 teachers in Michigan. An instrument especially designed for this study was sent to the approximately 1,000 teachers selected in Detroit and the 2,000 teachers selected from the rest of the state. The instrument was designed to gather descriptive data about the state's teacher Cecilia Morris professional development system with respect to three basic research questions. 1. Those questions were: What professional development activities are currently available in which state teachers participate? 2. What is the nature of the current delivery system of those pro­ fessional development services as perceived by teachers? 3. What are the perceived needs of teachers and their receptivity to more professional development? The data were computer summarized in percentages and means and were reported in tables. Also, in some cases data were reported by strata of the sample to make comparisons between categories. Further analysis between categories were conducted by the use of the analysis of variance. The data analysis indicated that professional development services are, on average, widely available to Michigan's teachers. However, it was also seen that those services are not equally distributed around the state. Detroit teachers had the largest amount of profes­ sional development services available. The Upper Peninsula teachers had the least amount of activities available to them. The quality of the services provided was generally found to be of high quality as judged by the teachers. There were some variations by area, however, in the teachers1 perceptions of the services they received. In respect to their own receptivity to professional development, teachers were very enthusiastic about participating in more professional development. They particularly were interested in receiving professional development from high quality resource people and preferred well organized, prac­ tical professional development activities. In Memory of Dr. Archibald B. Shaw Whose personal commitment to education created an environment which permitted me the opportunity to grow in many important ways. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Stanley Wronski, Guidance Committee Chairman, for his assistance in the completing of this study. Thanks are also due to the other committee members, Dr. Norma Bobbitt, Dr. Charles Blackman, and Dr. Cleo Cherryholmes. 1 would like to extend a special thanks to all my colleagues in the Education Division, Office of the Budget, Department of Manage­ ment and Budget, for their support and encouragement throughout this process. Appreciation is especially due to Dr. Fred Whims, Director of the Education Division, for providing encouragement when it was especially needed. 1 am also grateful to Paul Reinhart, Budget Analyst, for his enthusiastic support of this project and the concept of "rational decision-making in government." Special thanks are also extended to the many Mason friends who provided support and encouragement. Especially appreciated is Mrs. Betty Guerriero whose gracious hospitality and superb Italian spaghetti dinners helped sustain our family through my many academic struggles. . Finally, I wish to gratefully acknowledge my "silent partners" in this project— my family. in many important ways. Angie and Mark contributed to this study Their many hours of cooking and cleaning helped make the completion of this project possible. But of even more importance was their being the caring persons they are. A surprise rose, when it was badly needed; a "You can do it, Mom," when I wasn't sure, was deeply appreciated. Most of all, I would like to thank my husband, David, whose courage, and determined belief in a humane, rational government— in spite of everything, has been my model throughout this long, but growing, process. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF T A B L E S ............................................. ix LIST OF FIGURES............................................. xii CHAPTER I. THE PROBLEM......................................... 1 Statement of the Problem ........................ Purpose ......................................... N e e d ........................................... Definitions..................................... Limitations of This Research .................... O v e r v i e w ....................................... 10 11 13 II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............................ 14 III. 1 8 8 Evaluation Research as an Educational Policy Making T o o l ................................... The History of Teacher Professional Development as a Policy Issue.............................. The Current Status of Teacher Professional Development Policy ............................ Some Important Issues Related to Teacher Professional Development Policy ................. 42 METHODOLOGY......................................... 57 Rationale...................... Research Questions .............................. Setting of the S t u d y ............................ Selection of Samples ............................ Development of the Instrument.................... Collection of the D a t a .......................... Treatment of the D a t a ............................ Limitation of the Data--Nonresponse ............... 57 58 60 61 62 63 64 vi 15 25 35 66 CHAPTER IV. Page ANALYSIS OF D A T A ................................... Characteristics of Respondents .................. 69 70 Respondents' Teaching Responsibilities ....... Respondents' Teaching Level .................. Respondents' Educational Level ............... Type of Certification ........................ Major or Minor A r e a .......................... Size of School District ...................... 70 74 75 75 76 76 Available Professional Development Activities in Which State Teachers Participate ............. 77 Number of Activities Attended ................ Number of Hours of Professional Development............................... Differences in the Availability of Services in Different Areas of the State................................. Differences in the Availability of Services in School Districts of Different Sizes.............. 87 The Nature of the Current Professional Development Delivery System .................... 90 77 80 82 Service Providers ............................ Attributes of Professional Development ....... Differences in Teachers' Perceptions of Professional Development Services by Area of the State.......................... Differences in Teachers' Perceptions of Professional Development Services by School District S i z e ...................... Contract Provisions .......................... 107 107 Perceived Needs of Teachers and Their Receptivity to More Professional Development ............... 113 Important Attributes of Professional Development............................... Teachers' Need or Willingness ................. Differences in Perceived Need by Area . . . . . . Differences in Perceived Need by District S i z e ............................. Summary........................................ vii 92 95 104 114 117 119 119 120 CHAPTER Page V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS.............................. 123 Summary........................................ Major Findings ................................. Discussion and Implications...................... Implications for Further Research ................ 123 125 132 135 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................... 138 APPENDICES................................................. 146 APPENDIX A. PROPOSED PLAN FOR TEACHER INSTITUTES................... 146 B. QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . ............................ 148 C. FIELD TEST QUESTIONNAIRE............................ 156 \ viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Respondents' Primary Area of Teaching Responsibility ... 71 2. Respondents' Teaching Level ............................ 72 3. Respondents' Educational Level 72 ........................ 4. Respondents' Type of Certification..................... 73 5. Respondents' Teaching Responsibilities in Major or Minor A r e a ........................................ 73 6 . Size of School Districts in Respondents' W o r k ........... 74 7. Teachers Participating in Professional Development Activities........................................ 78 8 . Number of Activities in Which Teachers Participated . . . . 78 9. Number of Hours Spent in Teacher Professional Development........................................ 80 10. Hours of Professional Development Participation by Service Provider ................................... 81 11. Teacher Participation by Area .......................... 84 12. Number of Activities per Participant by Area ........... 84 13. Number of Hours per Participant by Area ................. 84 14. Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differences in Teacher Participation in Professional Development Activities by A r e a ................................. 86 15. Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differences in Hours of Teacher Participation in Professional Development by Area ................................. 86 16. Teacher Participation by School District Size ........... 88 17. Number of Activities per Participant by School District S i z e ....................................... 89 ix Table 18. 19* 20. 21. Page Number of Hours per Participant by School District S i z e .............................................. 89 Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differ­ ences in Teacher Participation in Professional Development Activities by School District Size ....... 91 Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differ­ ences in Hours of Teacher Participation in Pro­ fessional Development by School District Size ......... 91 Participation in Professional Development by Service P r o v i d e r ......... 93 22. Number of Activities per Participant by Provider ....... 93 23. Number of Hours per Participant by Provider ............. 93 24. Characteristics of Services as Reported by Detroit Teachers ..................................... 96 Characteristics of Services as Reported by Outstate T e a c h e r s .......................................... 97 Characteristics of Services as Reported by Statewide T e a c h e r s .......................................... 98 Applicability of Professional Development Experiences to Teaching as Reported by Detroit Teachers ........... 99 Applicability of Professional Development Experiences to Teaching as Reported by Outstate Teachers ......... 99 Applicability of Professional Development Experiences to Teaching as Reported by Statewide Teachers ......... 100 30. College CreditEarnedby 101 31. College Credit Earnedby Outstate Participants 32. College Credit Earnedby Statewide Participants 33. Professional Development Costs Reported by Detroit T e a c h e r s .......................................... 102 Professional Development Costs Reported by Outstate T e a c h e r s .......................................... 102 Professional Development Costs Reported by Statewide T e a c h e r s .......................................... 103 27. 28. 29. 34. 35. Detroit Participants ...... x . 26. 101 . 25. 101 Table Page 36. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Local Schools by Area .................... 105 37. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Intermediate Districts by Area ........... 105 38. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Higher Education by Area ................. 106 39. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Centers by A r e a ...................... 106 40. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Local Schools by District Size ........... 108 41. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Intermediate Schools by District Size. . . . 109 42. Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Higher Education by District Size ......... 110 43. Applicability of Professional Development Experience Provided by Centers by District Size ................. Ill 44. Contract Provision Reported by Detroit Respondents . . . . 112 4 5 . Contract Provisions Reported by Outstate Respondents 112 . . . 46. Contract Provisions Reported by Statewide Respondents. . . 113 47. Characteristics Reported as Being Important Statewide . . . 115 48. Preferred Service Providers ............................ 117 49. Need for Expansion of Professional Development Services ..................................... 118 50. Perceived Benefit ..................................... 118 51. Perceived Need by A r e a .............. 119 52. Perceived Need by District Size xi ................. 121 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Page The Professional Development System .................... xii 7 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem One of the major functions of state government is the establish­ ment of a system for the education of its youth. From the earliest days of the Northwest Territory, Michigan has had written policy providing for education. However, the development of state policies that would actually put in place a system that would provide quality education to all students in the state has been an ongoing struggle.* In the last decade, state level efforts to improve the state's educational system focused on two areas for reform. and accountability. Those two areas were school finance Both the quantity of dollars available for K-12 education, and the structure for the distribution of those dollars have altered in the last decade. Per pupil state formula expenditures for K-12 education in Michigan increased 37 percent from 1967-68 to 1977-78 with inflation being held constant. Also under the influence of a national movement for educational finance reform, and further stimulated by the Thomas Report which documented the inequities of Michigan's *For a history of Michigan education, see Floyd R. Dain, Education in the Wilderness (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968); Charles R. Starring and James 0. Knauss, The Michigan Search for Educational Standards (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968); Donald W. Disbrow, Schools for an Urban Society (Lansing: Michigan Historical Society, 1968). finance system, 2 the state legislature enacted a power equalizing school aid formula in 1972. Also in 1972, the state implemented an account­ ability system intended to improve the quality of education in Michigan. However, in spite of these major state level policy thrusts designed to improve the quality of education, dissatisfaction with the existing educational system still exists and new state educational policy is being developed to improve the quality of education in Michigan. Current state efforts focus on upgrading the knowledge and skills of teachers as a means of improving education. In a Michigan Department of Education interim report entitled "Professional Develop­ ment," it is argued that a state wide professional development system is needed, in part because "parents and public expectations of teacher performance have increased sharply. Pupils are dissatisfied with 3 present programs . . . ." In the early 1970s legislative concern for teacher preparation was expressed by the formation of a Special Senate Committee on Teacher Education. The committee focused on teacher preparation, but also considered the issue of continuing teacher educa­ tion. That committee's 1973 report indicated support for inservice training and stated, ". . . the objectives of inservice instructions for teachers have been generally vague, process rather than product 2 J. Alan Thomas, School Finance and Educational Opportunity in Michigan: Michigan School Finance Study (Lansing: Michigan Depart­ ment of Education, 1968). 3 Michigan Department of Education, "Professional Development 1974-75 Interim Report" (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, revised October 10, 1974), p. 2. (Zeroxed) 3 oriented, and aimed at meeting group needs rather than the needs of individuals."^ With some ambivalence, Michigan has expanded its responsibilities and funding for teacher professional development in the last few years. In 1975 the legislature appropriated $500,000 for the establishment of a Michigan Department of Education operated teacher professional develop­ ment center at Wayne State University with the qualification that the funds not be disbursed until a program plan was submitted. It was further stated in that legislation that "it is the intention of the legislature that this program not be funded after June 30, 1976.^ How­ ever, in June 1976 the legislature chose to appropriate $430,000 for that program which was then called the Wayne County program.** In 1977, a total of $1,270,000 was allocated for professional development. That $1,270,000 included funds for the Michigan Department of Education's Wayne center, which is currently called the Detroit teacher professional development center; planning for additional centers, operating two other centers, monitoring and evaluating the centers, and for the pro­ fessional development of teachers in the area of career education. There are currently three state supported teacher professional develop­ ment centers in operation. And, a recent study conducted by the 4 Special Senate Committee on Teacher Education, "The Training of Teachers in Michigan" (Lansing: Michigan Senate, June 15, 1973), p. 49. 5Act No. 252, Public Acts of 1975. 6Act No. 249, Public Acts of 1976. ^Act No. 209, Public Acts of 1977. 4 Michigan Department of Education recommends the establishment of approxi­ mately twenty-five centers plus increased funding to colleges and local O school districts for teacher professional development. The first year cost estimated by the Michigan Department of Education is over $3 9 million for that proposal. However, rational policy decision making would require that state decision makers have certain kinds of empirical information before the state makes a greater commitment to an expanded state role in teacher professional development. To obtain that information it is necessary to conduct evaluation research (or that research which is designed to provide information to decision makers) at a state wide g Erwin P. Bettinghaus, Richard V. Farace, and Peter R. Monge, "A State Plan for School Staff Development in Michigan" (East Lansing: Communimetrics, Inc., 1978). (Zeroxed) q The shifting, unsettled aspects of teacher professional development as a state policy issue were recently demonstrated by changes in the state teacher professional development policy after the completion of this study. Public Act 94 of 1979 (the school aid act) appropriates funds for local and intermediate school districts as a special category of the school aid fund, rather than as a program within the Department of Education. P.A. 94 states: . . there is allocated not to exceed $3,200,000 to applicant districts and inter­ mediate districts for local professional staff development and career education in-service programs. Each district and intermediate dis­ trict shall be eligible to receive $25.00 per professional staff per­ son." Thus, as a result of that act, teacher centers are no longer mandated. A further incentive for districts to establish such centers is contained in the provision of an additional $10,00 for schools that choose to work together. Specifically the act states: "Each district or intermediate school district with a professional development staff equal to or greater than 750, or a consortium of districts, intermediate districts, or a combination of districts and intermediate districts with professional staff of 750 or more shall be eligible for an additional $10.0D per professional staff member . . . ." The act further requires that "the policy board shall consist of a majority of teachers with the balance of the board composed of representatives of district or inter­ mediate districts boards of education, administrators, and other sup­ port personnel." 5 level. Heretofore, although there is a vast amount of educational research conducted by various organizations in the state, state educa­ tional policy has had little basis in state wide evaluation research. As Guba points out, "the evaluator’s traditional point of focus has been microscopic, e.g., the individual student, the classroom or the school building, rather than macroscopic, e.g., the school district, the state system, . . . . The focus serves the evaluator badly at the superordinate levels.Tr a di ti o na l educational research, rooted as it is in individual and process oriented psychological research, has not kept pace with policy makers needs for macro level evaluation research. This need will be especially great as the federal and state mood for spending becomes increasingly restrictive and difficult budget­ ary decisions are to be made. In order to make educational policy decisions, state decision makers need a variety of types of information. At the first stage of developing policy, decision makers need information about what does exist, what the parameters of any existing system are, the distribution of any related programs, the number of persons affected, etc. However, although there is considerable state level interest in teacher profes­ sional development services expressed, there is no systematic state wide information regarding the professional development system. There is, thus, no empirical evidence available to state decision makers upon which to base decisions as to whether or not to expand or alter the existing system. Some of the Michigan Department of Education’s ^Egon G. Guba, "The Failure of Educational Evaluation" in Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), p. 262. 6 Professional Development Advisory Councils have conducted "needs assess ments." The results of those efforts are set forth in the Michigan Department of Education report, "Professional Development Advisory Council Needs Assessment." However, the data on which this report was based were not collected on a state wide basis. Furthermore, there was not a standard instrument used to collect the data. Council developed its own instrument. Instead, each And, according to the report, "individual PDAC's decided how respondents were to identify themselves. Such options were curriculum area, position, school level, school build ing, district, degree and e x p e r i e n c e . T h e councils also had the ability to decide what groups or what individuals would be asked to respond to the instrument they designed. Thus, although the data may have been of local use, there was no attempt made to collect data in a manner that would permit generalizations to be made about state wide needs. Further, as Scriven and Roth point out, the designation of the process described as a "needs assessment" is highly questionable. As they point out, "it's important not to confuse a needs assessment with an exercise in building political support . . . ." 12 They maintain that "the use of the number of teachers1 votes as the key index for severity of need is ludicrous . . . ." 13 And, as they point out, ^Michigan Department of Education, "Professional Development Advisory Council Needs Assessment: Fall, 1977" (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, January 26, 1978), p. 3. 12 Michael Scriven and Jane Roth, "Needs Assessment: Concept and Practice," New Directions for Program Evaluation 1 (Spring, 1978):8. 13 Ibid., p. 10 . 7 traditionally, needs assessment is defined as "determination of the 14 difference between what is and what ought to be . . . ." Thus, in terms of the first stage of developing policy, there is yet a need to gather information about the state of the system. In order to determine what the existing system is like, it is necessary to first consider the essential components of the system. Those components are: the professional development service provider, the professional development service recipients, and the students. Figure 1 illustrates the three major components of the professional service provider <--- » service recipient <---- » student Fig. 1.— The Professional Development System. development system. The nature of each of these elements and their interaction are the essence of any professional development system. In regard to the recipients, the teachers, it is important to know if they see a need or have the willingness to participate in an expanded, or altered, system. It is also important to know if there are certain professional development attributes that might influence a teacher's willingness to participate in those professional development activities. In regard to the service providers, it is important to know: what orga­ nizations provide those services, in what areas of the state are the services provided, to whom are the services provided, how frequently 14 Ibid., p. 1 . 8 are these services available? It is also important to know how those services available compare to teachers' expectations for those services. Purpose The purpose of this research is to collect, on a state wide, systematic basis, information that contributes to policy decision makers' understanding of the current professional development system. In order to provide that information, two components of the teacher professional development system were investigated. Those two components were: the professional development service providers and the professional devel­ opment service recipients. Service providers were examined in regard to the availability and distribution of services provided. They were also investigated in regard to the nature of the provided services. The service recipients, or teachers, were surveyed as to their perceived needs and receptivity to professional development. The analysis of the results will assist in providing a broad understanding of the existing system, clarify misconceptions that may exist about the system, and will contribute to improving the policy decisions made pertaining to the issue of teacher professional development. Need There are three main reasons why an evaluation study of Michigan's professional development system is needed. study is timely and important. First, the State decision makers have struggled with this issue in every legislative session for the past few years, and yet teacher professional development remains an unresolved legislative issue. Furthermore, policy decisions made regarding professional 9 development will be of importance to the entire state educational system. All of Michigan's nearly 100,000 professionals (who work with over two million students) will be affected by any decisions made on this subject. Also, the annual expenditure, in a period of fiscal limitations, of the estimated $3 million or more for professional development means those funds will not be available for other state program goals— including other educational programs. Not only is this study timely and important in regard to state policy makers, it is also of significance to those organizations and persons who must plan and implement professional development services. Many influences are working to change the existing system. There is a need to provide those who must work to meet new demands and expectations some systematic information on what does exist and what areas may need alterations or expansion of services. This study is also needed because, despite the importance and timeliness of professional development at the state level, there has been no state wide, systematic attempt to determine what the current status of both the professional development service providers and service recipients are. This study looks at both components from a state wide perspective. Lastly, this study addresses the need to begin to direct state technical and research capacity to the improvement of the state's educational system within a useful theoretical evaluation framework. The state's research and technical capacity has grown in the past few years, as has the relatively new field of evaluation research theory. Until recently, however, the theoretical world has seldom, if ever, 10 merged with the "real world" of state level politics, computers, bud­ gets, and time constraints for the purpose of focusing on educational i s s u e s . F o r educators to develop the capacity to use, coordinate, and focus these resources and theories on the evaluation of educational issues and the development of state educational policy is of major importance to the future of the state's educational system. This study coordinated the computer capacities of three major state departments and two universities and also called upon the research expertise in three departments and two universities. In summary, three reasons are given to support the argument that this study is needed. First, it is timely and important to both state policy makers and to those persons and organizations responsible for planning and implementing professional development services. Secondly, no systematic studies of the two major components of the state wide professional development system have been done. And third, this study is a step in the direction of developing the capacity to channel state technical and research capacity to the resolution of state educational issues within the framework of evaluation research. Definitions Professional development - In order to be consistent with previous state level work on professional development, this research uses the definition of professional development set forth by the One recent application of evaluation research to a state educational issue is the report: Michigan Department of Management and Budget, The Michigan Educational Assessment Program: A Study of Test Score Utilization, technical report 1978-1 (Lansing: State of Michigan, 1978). 11 Michigan Department of Education at the time the research was designed. "Professional development is a planned and organized effort to provide teachers and other educational workers with the knowledge and skills necessary to facilitate improved student learning and performance and to meet additional needs of students. State professional development system - For the purposes of this study, state professional development system is defined as that collec­ tion of professional development services that are supported by state and/or local tax dollars. Teachers - For the purpose of this study, teachers will be defined as those individuals on the State Department of Education's 1977-78 Professional Personnel Register with the exclusion of the AAdministrator category and the NY-School Nurse category. Limitations of This Research The data analysis of the research will be limited in two ways. First, the data collection method will limit the inferences that can be made about subgroups within the sample. Although comparisons are made between subgroups within the sample, such as between persons in Northern Michigan and Southern Michigan, it is not possible to make precise generalizations about these groups since the sampling plan was designed to sample more broadly than those groups. Also, this data will be limited by the method of data collection, a mailed question­ naire. Nonresponse is uncontrollable in an anonymous mailed survey, Michigan Department of Education, "State Plan for Profes­ sional Development of School Staffs" (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, December 7, 1977), p. 3. 12 and the inferential statistics which are the theoretical foundation for survey sampling assume 100 percent response. However, as Babbie points out, researchers usually consider a reasonably good response rate (over 50 percent) as a good indication that the responses are probably 17 representative of the sample surveyed. naire was a little under 50 percent. encourage a good response rate. The return for this question­ The questionnaire was designed to However, there are several external factors, such as teacher strikes and the fact that the questionnaires were mailed bulk rate and districts were thus not obliged to deliver them to the teachers that could have affected the rate of response. Also, this research, as evaluation research, has the limitations always associated with evaluation research; it was conducted in a com­ plex social and political environment. As Weiss points out, "researchers who undertake the evaluation of social action programs are engaged in an enterprise fraught with hazards." 18 In addition to the practical and conceptual problems associated with evaluation research, it is becoming, as Weiss points out, "increasingly political." 19 Thus, there may be unknown variables that limit this research because it is evaluation research. The fact, for example, that professional development is an important political issue could have influenced teachers' responses. 17 Earl L. Babbie, Survey Research Methods (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1973, p. 165. 18 Carol H. Weiss, "The Politicization of Evaluation Research" in Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), p. 367. 13 Also, broader social and political issues could influence teachers' responses. This research, for example, was conducted in the fall of the year when many school districts were resolving contract disputes. And, teachers in striking districts may feel differently about profes­ sional development than do teachers in districts that settle contracts amiably. Also, the evaluator is a part of that complex political milieu. This evaluator holds many roles related to teacher professional develop­ ment issues. Those roles include: izen and taxpayer, parent of students, political activist in many areas--and particularly in the area of educational issues, and state employee responsible for conduct­ ing policy-related studies of various educational issues for budgeting purposes— including teacher professional development. Overview This study is reported in five chapters. Chapter I presents the purpose of the study, the need for the study, definition of terms, and the limitation of the study. Chapter II reviews the literature related to this study. The methodology and procedures used to conduct this study are presented in Chapter III. An analysis of the data collected from the questionnaire is presented in Chapter IV. Chapter V presents a summary and the conclusions drawn from this study. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE The purpose of this study is to investigate teacher profes­ sional development from the perspective of evaluation research. In order to understand teacher profess m a l development as an evaluation research issue it is necessary to understand the background and role of evaluation research in educational policy making. And, it is also necessary to understand teacher professional development as a state policy issue. This chapter is a review of that literature related to evaluation research as an educational policy making tool, and also of that literature related to teacher professional development as a state policy issue. The Review of the Literature is divided into four sections: 1. Evaluation research as an educational policy making tool; 2. The history of teacher professional development as a policy issue; 3. Some important issues related to teacher professional develop­ ment policy; and, 4. The current status of teacher professional development policy. The first section will trace the development of evaluation research and discuss some of its important concepts. The last three sections will trace the historical development of teacher professional 14 IS development as a government issue and provide the general background of issues and trends in the nation and state with particular emphasis on state policy. Evaluation Research as an Educational Policy Making Tool The future of public education will not be determined by public need alone. It will be determined by those who can translate public need into public policy— by schoolmen iji politics. Since the quality of our society rests in large measure upon the quality of our public education, a widespread recognition that schoolmen must be not only aware of politics but influential in politics, may be the key to our survival t a free and civilized nation.* As Bailey points out above, educators must be skilled in trans­ lating educational need into policy. However, as Iannaccone points out: The bulk of the educationists cling to the words, if not the reality, the shadow, rather than the substance, and are almost incapable of thinking of politics and education except prescriptively as other than discrete and immaculately untouching worlds. The myth that education is not politics— or stated prescriptively, that either "education should not be involved in politics," or "politics should not be involved in education"— virtually ruled the minds of many professors of education and the public state­ ment of educators . . . ."^ And Iannaccone points out the inter-relatedness of education and politics: " . . . paying attention to the realities of American life, 3 education and politics are and have been inextricably related." An important key to improved education is the development of improved edu­ cational policy through the political process. It is essential for Stephen K. Bailey et al_., Schoolmen and Politics: A Study of State Aid to Education in the Northeast (Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1962), p. 108. 2 Laurence Iannaccone, Politics in Education (New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1967), p. 6. 3Ibid. 16 educators to learn to use the tools of the political process to influ­ ence educational policy. One of the most important developments in educational policy making in the last few years has been the increasing use of research as a tool in policy making. As Karabel and Halsey state: Over the last generation educational research has come from the humblest margins of the social sciences to occupy a central posi­ tion in sociology, as well as to receive considerable attention from economists, historians, and anthropologists. A parallel growth in the use of research for educational policy-making has been no less evident. This increasing emphasis on evaluation research is the logical applica­ tion of the philosophy of the Enlightenment, with its emphasis on rationality and empiricism, which was one of the major influences in the development of this nation's political philosophy. As Rivlin points out, to attempt to develop rational means of government decision­ making is also to have faith in the ability of nations to solve some of their problems by collective action and some faith that analysis of a problem generally leads to a better decision.^ The rest of this section focuses on the development of the use of social science research, and particularly the use of evaluation research in educational policy making, in this century. Over time, as this nation matured politically, there has been an increase in the use of social sciences as a policy making tool. As this century approached, Woodrow Wilson argued that the time had passed 4 Jerome Karabel and A. H. Halsey, Power and Ideology in Educa­ tion (New York: Oxford University Press, 1977), p. 1. ^Alice M. Rivlin, Systematic Thinking for Social Action (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1971), p. 1. 17 when American intellectual efforts were needed to develop and refine a Constitution and urged the application of that intellect to the develg opment of a public administration science. The use of social sciences by government steadily increased as government increasingly accepted responsibility for social reform. In the 1930s Stephan urged the use of social sciences to evaluate the impact of governmental programs. He suggested that Federal agency plans could be "looked upon as the crea7 tion of experimental laboratories . . . ." The same concept was reiterated in the 1960s by Campbell in "Reforms as Experiments." In that article he argued that "the United States and other modern nations g should be ready for an experimental approach to reform . . . ." The reform movement of the 1960s did indeed produce increased interest in evaluation research. As Caro pointed out, "interest in evaluation research has been greatly stimulated in the past decade by widespread concern for domestic social reform." g Indeed, evaluation came to be seen as a means of directing or changing governmental and social directions. In 1975, Bernstein and Freeman stated "in a broad ^Woodrow Wilson, "The Study of Administration," Political Science Quarterly 2 (June, 1887):197-222. 7 Stephen Stephan, "Prospects and Possibilities: The New Deal and New Social Research," Social Forces 13 (May, 1935):516. g Donald T. Campbell, "Reforms as Experiments," American Psychologist 24 (April, 1969):409. g Francis G. Caro (ed.), Readings in Evaluation Research (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1971), p. xiii. 18 context, evaluation research can be seen as a major social change force."*^ Also, growing pressures for fiscal restraint and accountability have caused government decision makers to increasingly turn to evalua­ tion research for information that would be useful in allocating scarce resources. As Caro comments: "Success, of course, is a relative con­ cept, but it is fair to observe that in virtually all areas the increased public and private expenditures of the past decade simply have not appreciably improved the social order, . . Rivlin also comments: In recent years, Americans have devoted a growing share of their national resources to public programs for meeting social needs. Funds for education, health services, manpower training, income maintenance, and related programs are expanding rapidly in state, local, and federal budgets. Yet dissatisfaction with these pro­ grams has never been more widespread.1^ The dilemma that government decision makers face is described by Hatry and others: Executive and legislative officials in government have to make difficult decisions about how to use limited resources to meet the needs of the people government serves. Throughout the year, but particularly at budget times, they have to decide whether to continue an existing program or to adopt new proposals or some alternative to an existing program. Short of guess-work or rely­ ing on the way things have always been done, how should govern­ ment officials decide?1^ Ilene Nagel Bernstein and Howard E. Freeman, Academic and Entrepreneurial Research: The Consequences of Diversity in Federal Evaluation Studies (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1975), p. 1. 11 Caro, 0£. cit., p. 1. 12 Rivlin, 0£. cit., p. viii. 13 Harry P. Hatry et al_., Program Analysis for State and Local Governments (Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1976), p. 1. 19 Hatry also points out that "managers of all types of organizations, both public and private, need feedback to guide future decisions regarding continuation or modification of their organizations' activities." 14 He recommends the use of program evaluation and points out that "too many state and local governments lack the feedback necessary to measure pro­ gram effectiveness."*5 As pointed out earlier, the hope of evaluation research is that it is possible to have rational governmental decision-making. Thus, government decision makers have increasingly looked to evaluation research in their attempt to increase the rationality of government policies in an era of burgeoning government programs. As Bernstein and Freeman point out, " . . . interestingly, it is the politician, the government official, and the social planner who now are the strongest advocates of evaluation research; it is not a social science lobby, but those in responsible places who are the current sponsors of evalu­ ation activities."*^ The reform movement of the 1960s not only provided the impetus for evaluation research but also the impetus for educational evaluation research since education played a major part in the reforms of that era. There developed a particularly great interest in educational research as a tool for policy decision making. The development of this 14 Harry P. Hatry, Richard E. Winnie, and Donald M. Fisk, Practical Program Evaluation for.State and Local Government Officials (Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1973), p. 7. ^Bernstein and Freeman, 0£. cit., p. x. 20 interest in education and educational research as an important aspect of social reform is discussed by Levine and Bane in The "Inequality*1 17 Controversy. They contend that the national attitude toward poverty has been ambiguous. Whereas we, as a nation, have been concerned with remedying unequal distribution of income, we have been unwilling to remedy the problem with outright cash grants, preferring instead the indirect social programs that hopefully would alleviate the problem. 18 Levine and Bane further point out that educational programs had particu­ lar appeal because of their indirectness, and "publicly supported educa­ tion, it seemed, could give the poor the tools they needed to escape from poverty by dint of their own efforts. It would not oblige Ameri- cans to violate the work ethic by creating a dole." 19 They further stated that an important catalyst in the develop­ ment of education as an anti-poverty policy was the 1954 Supreme Court ruling in Brown vs the School Board of Topeka, Kansas. That court ruling was based on the unequal results, i.e., school outputs, of segregated education. Thus, "equality of educational opportunity thenceforth would have to mean effective equality, in terms of some measure of school output." 20 That court decision provided the impetus ^Donald M. Levine and Mary Jo Bane, The "Inequality" Controversv: Schooling and Distributive Justice (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1975). 18Ibid., p. 3. 20- . . . . Ibxd., p. 4. 19Ibid., p. 4. 21 for a great deal of educational research, such as Coleman's Jenck's 22 21 and which was conducted to assess the impact of educational policy on educational outcomes. The research and discussions about the educa­ tional outcome of various educational policies continues today. However, although there has been a growth in the demand for evaluative education research, the availability of appropriate and useful evaluative data has been a problem. As Guba points out: the evaluator's traditional point of focus has been microscopic, e.g., the individual student, the classroom or the school building, rather than macroscopic, e.g., the school district, the state system, . . . The focus serves the evaluator badly at the super­ ordinate levels. 23 Traditional educational research, rooted as it is in individual and process oriented psychological research, has not kept pace with policy makers' needs for macro-level, systematic information. Thus, there is a need for educational research to concern itself more with macro-level evaluative research. This need will be especially great as the federal and state mood for spending becomes increasingly restrictive and diffi­ cult budgetary decisions must be made. Evaluation research, as a branch of social science research is relatively new and thus theory is still being formulated. Two important 21 James S. Coleman et al., Equality of Educational Opportunity (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of HEW, USOE, OE-38001, 1966). 22 Christopher Jencks et al., Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America (New York: Basic Books, 1972). 23 Egon G. Guba, "The Failure of Educational Evaluation" in Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), p. 262. 22 theoretical issues are frequently discussed by writers in the area: the nature and the purpose of evaluation research. According to Weiss, "what distinguishes evaluation research is not method or subject matter, but intent— the purpose for which it is done." 24 As she points out: Evaluation is intended for use. Where basic research puts the emphasis on the production of knowledge and leaves its use to the natural processes of dissemination and application, evaluation starts out with use in mind.2*5 Rossi and others also comment on this issue. They state: Perhaps the only legitimate distinction that can be drawn here is in the purpose for which research is conducted. Applied social research is directed to the solution of some real world problem; basic research, in contrast, is conducted to enhance the body of knowledge in the discipline. Weiss also cautions, however, that those "who look to evaluation to take the politics out of decision-making are bound to be disappointed . . ." because politics is the system we have for attaching value to facts." 27 She does point out, however, that what evaluation can do "is provide data that reduce uncertainties and clarify the gains and losses that different decisions incur." 28 Several writers have worked to develop a theoretical framework that would be useful in a decision making setting. Writers such as 24 Carol H. Weiss, Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972), p. 6. 26 Peter H. Rossi, James P. Wright, and Sonia R. Wright, "The Theory and Practice of Applied Social Research," Evaluation Quarterly 2 (May, 1978):171-193. 27 Weiss, 0£. cit., p. 4. 23 Edwards, 29 Suchman, 30 Rossi, 31 Alkin, 32 and others have contributed to the development of the types of evaluation research. Two particularly useful contributions to evaluation theory have been the work of Peter H. Rossi and of Marvin C. Alkin. of applied research. Rossi and others set forth a typology That typology is: 1. parameter estimation— which attempts to estimate distributional characteristics of some policy relevant phenomena. They point out that "to the policy maker, in short, even seemingly mundane pieces of information such as means and variances are critical 33 to the policy formation process . . . ." 2. monitoring— to follow trends in parameters over time, 3. modeling social phenomena— the construction of empirically based models, 4. evaluation of ongoing policies regarding effect, and 5. social experimentation.34 29 Wards Edwards, Marcia Guttentag, and Kurt Snapper, "A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Evaluation Research" in Elmer L. Struening and Marcia Guttentag (eds.), Handbook of Evaluation Research, Vol. I (Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1975), pp. 139-181. 30 Edward A. Suchman, "Action for What? A Critique of Evaluation Research" in Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), pp. 52-85. 31„ Rossi, £i>. cit. 32 Marvin C. Alkin, "Evaluation Theory Development" in Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Educa­ tion (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), pp. 105-118. 33 Rossi, 0]j. cit., p. 176. 34Ibid., pp. 171-193. 24 Alkin also set forth a decision-oriented classification of information needs addressed by evaluation research. They are: 1. information about the state of the system including the assess­ ing of needs, 2. information needed to select among alternative options that are likely to be effective in meeting specific identified needs, 3. information about the way in which a program is to be imple­ mented, 4. information for program improvement, and 5. information about the worth or success of a specific program. 35 In recent years, Michigan state officials have become aware of the contribution evaluation research can make in the resolution of public policy issues. In 1973, program budgeting was introduced in Michigan with the expectation that it would encourage systematic evaluation of state programs. In introducing the new budgeting system Governor Milliken stated: "While huge sums of money have been spent to address problems such as crime, unemployment, and environmental quality, often little was known about expected impact of existing, new and expanded government programs on these problems." 36 Although the new budgeting system was almost immediately a failure and was not used after that year, the concept of using evaluation research to assist 35 Alkin, 0£. cit. William G. Milliken, State of Michigan Executive Budget: Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1974 (Lansing: State of Michigan, 1973), p. 1. 25 policy makers is still of interest to many. The legislature is cur­ rently considering a sunset bill which would require the periodic evaluation of existing state programs. 37 Thus, Michigan is moving toward an increased use of evaluation research in policy making. The History of Teacher Professional Development as a Policy Issue Even though teacher professional development is a current state policy issue, it has also been an historical issue. The concern for improving teaching skills has existed as a state policy issue almost as long as has the concern for establishing an adequate educational system. In fact, the two issues have generally been seen as being strongly related to one another. This portion of the Review of the Literature traces briefly the history of teacher inservice or professional devel­ opment policy in Michigan. This paper focuses on the professional development of those already engaged in teaching, not those persons preparing to teach. However, since in early history, teacher basic preparation and teacher inservice or professional development were fre­ quently the same thing, basic teacher preparation will also be dis­ cussed. The history of professional development in Michigan will be reviewed by first discussing some of the highlights of the development of educational policy in Michigan and then the development of teacher inservice policy. Michigan's teacher professional development policy has its roots in American and European educational history. Until well into the 1800s teachers in the United States seldom had training specifically 37HB 4357. 26 for teaching. As Tyler points out, thousands of teachers were employed who had little or no preparation for teaching. 38 However, the awareness of the need for such preparation is seen as early as 1685 in Rheims, France where the first known European teacher education was provided. 39 It was, however, not until the 1800s when Prussia inaugurated state conducted teacher seminaries, that the concept of state supported teacher education was seriously discussed in the United States. The first state to establish state supported teacher education was Massa­ chusetts. That state established a school especially for teacher preparation in 1839. 40 But it was not until this century that states established statewide certification standards which required teachers to have a college degree. Thus, as Tyler points out, until recently, teacher inservice has been largely two or three day institutes designed to remedy gaps in the teacher's education. 41 In Michigan, the history of teacher inservice policy reflects the state's broader struggle to establish an adequate system of educa­ tion. The history of Michigan's educational policy can be seen as a struggle of contrasting and conflicting needs and values of the citizens 38 Ralph W. Tyler, "In-service Education of Teachers: A Look at the Past and Future," in Louis J. Rubin (ed.), Improving In-service Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1971), p. 39 Adolphe E. Meyer, An Educational History of the American People (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967), p. 375. 40 Charles A. Harper, A Century of Public Teacher Education (Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1939), p. 9, 41 Tyler, oj>. ext., p. 6. 27 of the state. 42 On the one hand, Michigan leaders highly valued edu­ cation, as did many of the citizens arriving in the state from the East where schools had been in existence for some time. But, on the other hand, the immediacy of surviving in a frontier wilderness at first, and a desire to not spend more than absolutely necessary later, worked against the desire for quality education. From the early 1700s until 1835 and the adoption of the new Constitution of the State of Michigan, various well-meaning attempts to establish universally available education was unsuccessful. Under the influence of the central­ ized Prussian educational system, the writers of the 1835 Constitution emphasized a strong system of education which included a Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the funding of schools by state funds as well as local taxation. Over time, however, the problems of a rapidly growing frontier state, combined with strong citizen resistance to taxation for educational purposes, worked against the establishment of an adequate system of education. The 1850 Constitution re-emphasized the State's commitment to education, but again, economic difficulties prevented the development of an educational system to meet the hopes of the educational leaders in the state. Rural areas of the state were particularly lacking in adequate educational facilities. Excerpts from the "Michigan School Reports'.' of 1865 demonstrate the extent of the problem. From Essex in Clinton County, a school inspector reports: 42 This portion of the Review of the Literature is drawn from Floyd R. Dain, Education in the Wilderness (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968); Charles R. Starring and James 0. Knauss, The Michigan Search for Educational Standards (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commis­ sion, 1968); Donald W. Disbrow, Schools for an Urban Society (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968). 28 In two districts they have no schoolhouse; and as to grounds, there is not a schoolhouse in the whole town inclosed (sic) by any kind of fence; and in several instances, in hot days, the teachers have informed us, they have been compelled to close the outer door to keep the neighbors' hogs from devouring the chil­ dren’s dinner and clothing . . . And from another part of Clinton County: "One district in Ovid, with ninety-nine children, reports a school-house valued at ten dollars! good people, where is thy blush?" 44 0, However, as the turn of the century arrived and the State of Michigan was no longer a rough frontier state, the basics of a state system for education was established. As the shift from a rural, agricultural state to an urban, industrialized one took place new problems for education, as well as blessings, developed. The blessing was the growing tax dollars available for financing education. The problems were numerous. One of those prob­ lems was, and is, meeting the need for the continual improvement of Michigan's teachers. The importance of competent teachers to the success of the educational system was recognized by the first educational leaders in the state. The first Superintendent of Public Instruction, John Pierce, stressed that even the best system of schools would fail if it lacked competent teachers. 45 However, it was many years before the state established any system for providing those teachers. The greatest deterrents to establishing an adequate supply of well qualified 43 Michigan, "Michigan School Report," Michigan State Library Historical Collection. 45 Floyd R. Dain, Education in the Wilderness (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968), p. 234. 29 teachers were the same as those that beset the broader attempt to establish an adequate educational system— local control and costs. Pierce saw the problem as basically a financial one. If school dis­ tricts would pay an adequate price, good teachers could be found. He made several recommendations to the legislature that would insure that good teachers would be available and hired. Those recommendations included the withholding of state funds from districts that did not hire "thoroughly educated teachers," and the establishment of a normal school in every county. 46 Although most of Pierce’s ideas were incor­ porated into school law, many difficulties prevented the actual imple­ mentation of the system. The original Michigan school law of 1837 required townships to select inspectors to examine teachers to determine whether or not they were suitable to teach. If they were found suitable, the township inspector could certify the teacher to teach in that township. There were, however, no pre-established standards for "suitable" to teach. Thus, the standards were left solely to the township inspectors. 47 Frequently costs were a major factor in the certification of a teacher. The results were often not conducive to good education. To again cite the "Michigan School Report of 1865," from Richfield Township the school inspector commented: "The greatest difficulty I see in our town is, too many little girls for summer teachers. to govern and impart instruction; . . . " 46Ibid. 4®Michigan, 0£. cit. 48 They are wanting in judgment To which the Superintendent 47Ibid., p. 128. 30 of Public Instruction responded "The people are doing well if they get bright 'little girls' for teachers, for the wages they pay." 49 Teachers thus could be, and were, hired with any kind of prep­ aration or training. There were a variety of ways in which an individ­ ual could get some teacher preparation in the early 1800s in Michigan. Various secondary schools frequently would offer teacher training courses. Also, the branches of the University of Michigan, which were a sort of secondary or college prep schools, provided teacher training.^® By 1849, the legislature saw the need for a teacher preparation facility and established the state normal school in Ypsilanti, the first such institution west of the Alleghenies.51 However, all of these institutions only provided a small number of the teachers needed for Michigan schools, and in any case, the school districts were not required to hire the more competent teachers. For the most part, the most competent and well trained teachers were hired by the city schools which had more revenue available for the support of education. For many years, various Superintendents of Public Instruction urged the establishment of the office of County Superintendent. These offices would be full time and the Superintendent would oversee the quality of education, including the certification of teachers, in the 49_. ., Ibid. ^Richard Alan Barnes, "The Development of Teacher Education in Michigan" (part of a dissertation, Chicago: University of Chicago Libraries, 1942), pp. 79-80. 51 J. Alan Thomas, School Finance and Edilcational Opportunity: Michigan School Finance Study (Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1968), p. 9, 31 county. In 1867, the legislature enacted such a law, but it created considerable controversy and was repealed in a short time. It was charged that the system unnecessarily imposed increased educational costs by disqualifying many cheap teachers and by the extra cost of the Superintendent's salary. 52 In 1875 the system was abolished and replaced by a system of township supervision. The issue remained throughout the 1800s, with control varying from county to township level. By the turn of the century, however, control had been firmly established at the county level with a system of county superintendents. Concern continued throughout the last half of the nineteenth century and into the twentieth for the improvement of teachers. Efforts were made to improve the skills of teachers in a variety of ways. Some of the methods used extensively were teachers' institutes, reading circles and local teachers' associations. In 1877 state law required that men pay $1.00 and women pay 50$ to a county institute fund when applying for certification. Each county was to hold an annual county- wide teachers' institute and the state would help with expenses not covered by the county fund. solve the problem. 53 The law, however, did not completely In his report to the legislature in 1892, Superin­ tendent Fitch complained that the institutes too often consisted of "irrelevant talk," "dry-as-dust outlines," "each institute begins nowhere 52 Charles R. Starring and James 0. Knauss, The Michigan Search for Educational Standards (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968), p. 28. 53Ibid., p. 79. 32 in particular and leads to no definite stopping point," and teachers viewed institutes essentially as "a pleasant outing." Thus, the effect of the institutes was like "attempting to sweep back the waters of the sea with a broom . . . ."54,55 Therefore, the attempts to improve teacher skills continued. By 1897, the state normal schools were required to offer special rural courses.5^ And in 1903 the state passed a law establishing county normals that were to be financed by state, local and county funds. The county normals were particularly aimed at the needs of the small oneroom and two-room rural schools. When the county normals began their operation in 1903, only 2 percent of the rural teachers were educated beyond high school. By 1915, 60 percent of those rural teachers had had some county normal training. 57 County normals were simple insti­ tutions that did a big job for the state for many years. This writer discussed the county normals with a 1931 graduate of the Ingham County normal school which was located in the county seat of Mason. That school was located in one room in the Mason school building (a K-12 building at the time). The class consisted of approximately twentythree students. The students' instruction was the responsibility of 54 Michigan, Fifty-Sixth Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (Lansing: State of Michigan, 1892), pp. 233-239. 55See Appendix A for a plan proposed for institute instruction by the Superintendent of Public Instruction to remedy this problem. ^Donald W. Disbrow, Schools for an Urban Society (Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968), p. 35. 57Ibid., p. 34. 33 one regular teacher, the building principal, and on occasion, the County Superintendent. The school graduated between twenty to twenty-five students each year and those graduates supplied the teachers for Ingham County rural schools for years. 58 As higher certification standards were established through state law, the normal schools declined as students sought teacher preparation courses from colleges and universities. In 1962 the state replaced the County Superintendent with a system of intermediate dis­ tricts which could consist of areas larger than one county. There was not, however, any new system for teacher inservice provided. Since the early sixties the state has not had a systematic policy regarding the professional development of teachers. In 1966 the legislature authorized an investigation into the financing of elementary and secondary education in Michigan. 59 Part of that study looked at the inservice training available to teachers at that time in Michigan. It was pointed out in that study that "great progress has been made in both the quantity and the quality of continuing education programs during the last decade." 60 The progress made was attributed to several reasons: the increased federal funds avail­ able for teacher inservice, the large number of teachers attending higher education institutions, and the practice of local school dis­ tricts of providing inservice for their teachers. 58 However, the Interview with Ethelyn Stingley (Mason, June, 1979). 59 Thomas, op. cit., p . 1. 60Ibid., p. 87. 34 researchers also found considerable variation in the availability of inservice around the state. They reported that: Practices related to in-service training of Michigan's teachers vary considerably, both in terms of the extent to which various types of continuing professional education are utilized, and in the amount which is budgeted to support this aspect of teachers' professional growth. The evidence provided here shows clearly that the size of school system, wealth (SEV), per pupil expendi­ ture, geographical region, and the social class of dominant parental group, are all factors which are related in a signifi­ cant way to the continuing professional education of teachers in Michigan.61 Thus, teacher inservice, or professional development, has been an ongoing educational policy issue in Michigan. resolved issue. It is not, however, a It is, in fact, one of the most important educational policy issues under discussion at the state level. Schmieder and Yarger reveal the importance of teacher profes­ sional development as a policy issue in their discussion of teacher centers: The teacher or teaching center is one of the hottest educational concepts on the scene today— and that is no mean compliment, given the rapid ascendancy of career education, . . . It has been generally estimated that it takes over twenty years for a new innovation to work its way into the mainstream of American educa­ tion. It has taken less than half a decade for the teaching center to become a well known locus for new approaches to educa­ tional personnel development.6^ A variety of methods have been developed to address contemporary needs for teacher professional development. The next section of the search of the literature focuses on the different policies governments have developed in recent years to provide teacher professional development. 61Ibid., p. 90. 62 Allen A. Schmieder and Sam J. Yarger, "Teacher/Teaching Center­ ing in America," Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):5. 35 The Current Status of Teacher Professional Development Policy Teacher professional development has become an important educa­ tional policy issue at the state and national level. This portion of the search of the literature will review the status of teacher profes­ sional development policy in this nation and others. Teacher professional development policy has become international in scope. Many nations have adopted policies that are specifically designed to provide for the continuing professional development of teachers. As DeVault points out, "curriculum development and in-service education are two needs which have fostered the creation of teachers centers in many countries." 63 Taylor mentions Japan., Sweden, Denmark, Australia, Turkey, and Britain as nations which have some type of teacher professional development. 64 Taylor discusses some of the vari­ ances in the teacher professional development programs in those nations. Japan's system puts emphasis on single subject teaching centers, particularly those focusing on science. And the Japanese generally use release time as a means to encourage teacher attendance at profes­ sional development activities. Britain, on the other hand, seldom pro­ vides for release time and expects teachers to attend professional development activities during evenings or weekends. Sweden emphasizes state coordination of teacher professional development activities and 63 M. Vere DeVault, "Teacher Centers, An International Concept," The Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):37. 64 L. C. Taylor, "Reflections on British Teachers' Centres," in Kathleen Devaney (ed.), Essays on Teachers' Centers (San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977), pp. 133-146. 36 makes attendance compulsory for teachers. Britain, on the other hand, avoids any form of state direction or compulsion over inservice.85 Those involved in developing teacher professional development policy in the United States have been strongly influenced by the British model. Caldwell points out that recent United States teacher professional development legislation is 11. . . rooted in an extremely successful British prototype."88 The three basic purposes of the British system, according to Caldwell, are: (1) Inservice training that will further the growth of funda­ mental knowledge relevant to educational problems, (2) social gathering and interaction, and (3) curriculum development.^ Caldwell also points out that the British centers vary greatly. They have in common, he states, only the three basic purposes mentioned above and two underlying assumptions: "the local teacher center should be managed and directed by practicing teachers" and "professors of education should be kept at arm's length." 68 The concept that teacher centers should be directed by prac­ ticing teachers has also been important in recent United States teacher center legislation. The United States Congress enacted a law authoriz­ ing the establishment of teacher centers for teacher professional development in 1976.89 These centers would permit teachers to pursue 88Robert M. Caldwell, "Transplanting the British Teacher Center in the U.S.," Phi Delta Kappan 60 (March, 1979):517. 67Ibid., p. 518. 69P.L. 94-482, 1976. 68Ibid. 37 their professional development as they needed to improve their class­ room work, and would be managed by a policy board controlled by teachers. 70 However, the passage of the legislation establishing teacher centers was not the end of the development of teacher center policy. The Department of HEW also played a major role in developing the Federal teacher center policy in the process of developing the implementing rules for the program. Several important issues were raised in the process of devel­ oping the rules and were subsequently addressed in the rulemaking process. The Federal Register reported the major issues raised and how they were addressed in the rulemaking process. The highlights of those issues are presented in the following excerpts: Role of State educational agency. Public commentors were sharply divided over the role of State educational agencies in the teacher centers program and the compensation for the State educational agencies' services. Commentators representing teachers and their organizations wanted the role and compensation sharply reduced; the State educational agencies and chief State school officers wanted the role expanded, on the grounds that teacher center pro­ gram must become an integral part of the States' overall plans for inservice teacher education. The statute requires that State educational agencies review applications, make comments on the applications, and recommend each application . . . .71 The outcome of that discussion: . . . the one-seventh of total program funds, set aside as compen­ sation for the State educational agency services . . . is reduced to one-tenth in the final regulation.72 70TV.. Ibid. 71 Federal Register, Vol. 43, No. 7, Wednesday, January 11, 1978, p. 1763. 72,.., Ibid. 38 Another important issue was: Authority and representativeness of the teacher center policy board. The statute clearly gives the teacher center policy board responsibility for "supervising" the center, and this was reflected in the proposed regulation. However, public comment heavily favored increasing the authority of the teacher center policy board . . . . On the other hand, there was significant comment to the effect that if policy boards are allowed to make policy and control the center's budgets, conflicts could arise between the policy boards and the school districts' boards of education. And another important issue was: Setting aside the ten percent maximum for grants to institutions of higher education . . . . Public comment on this issue was sharply divided. Some commentors suggested that institutions of higher education be required to compete with local educational agencies, subject to the ten percent ceiling. However, the col­ leges and universities continue to play a vital role in the train­ ing of teachers. The Commissioner believes that the degreegranting and educational roles of institutions of higher education, together with their cooperative relationships with State educa­ tional agencies in teacher training and certification, iustify using the maximum set-aside authorized by the statute.^ Thus, federal legislation and the HEW rulemaking process have estab­ lished and shaped the newest federal government involvement in teacher professional development. In addition to the recently enacted teacher center legislation, the federal government provides for teacher professional development through other legislation. Feistritzer reports the results of research conducted to determine the involvement of the United States Office of Education in the professional development of educational personnel. 75 That study indicated that twenty-one of the USOE's 120 programs pro­ vide for educational personnel development. 73 Ibid. 74 The total estimated Ibid. 75 C. Emily Feitstritzer, "The Role of USOE in Inservice," Journal of Teacher Education 30 (January/February 19, 1979):36-38. 39 funding used for professional development for FY 1979 is $300 million.7<* According to Feitstritzer, inservice activities are provided by the USOE in several ways: Teacher Corps and Teacher Centers, both authorized under Title V of the Higher Education Act, are the only 0E programs concerned exclusively with the professional development of regular educa­ tional personnel. The other 19 programs are categorical: i.e., they have a component within a larger piece of legislation which allows for training of educational personnel to meet the needs of a specific population and/or content area, such as, education for handicapped bilingual, or vocational students.7? She further states: An overriding conclusion from these and other data is that there is a lack of coordination among USOE programs in the area of pro­ fessional development of educational personnel at the federal, state, and local levels.7® In summary, the federal government has increasingly expanded its efforts in the area of teacher professional development. With the recent passage of the teacher center legislation that involvement is moving toward a system similar to that in Britain. How the new program will work in the United States remains to be seen. British educator, David Burrell, indicates that 11. . . it is an open question whether the idea is transferable to the American situation." 79 Within the United States, some states have begun to consider and develop systematic, state-wide approaches to teacher professional 76Ibid., p. 36. 77Ibid. 78Ibid., p. 38. 79 David Burrell, "The Teacher Center: A Critical Analysis," Educational Leadership 33 (March, 1978):427. 40 development using the teacher center concept. Smith surveyed all fifty states regarding their efforts to develop teacher centers. He found that approximately 66 percent were at least studying the concept at the state level and approximately 36 percent had taken some State action, either legislatively or administratively. 80 One state that has been most active in implementing state-wide teacher professional development is Florida. state system in 1973. That state enacted a The guiding principles of that system are: — Teachers are the most important influences in a school's con­ tribution to student learning — Teachers are the key participants in any decision process for improving education — "Collaboration" among districts, institutions, and the teaching profession is confirmed as the best model for making program g^ decisions about the career long process of educating teachers. Florida law assigns the responsibility for operating programs among districts, higher education and the teaching profession. The local teacher education centers are administered by a council, the majority of which must be classroom teachers. The centers are primarily funded jointly by participating school districts and higher education institutions. The local districts receive state school aid that is earmarked for teacher professional development and higher education institutions receive the same credit in the state's higher education 80 Emmitt D. Smith, "The State of the State in Teacher Center­ ing," The Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):21-25. 81 Florida Department of Education, "Florida Teacher Education Centers: A Review of Policy and Policy Implementation" (Tallahassee: Florida Department of Education, 1977), p. 13. 41 funding mechanism for all noncredit student contact hours in teacher centers as they would for upper division credit courses. 82 A recent evaluation of the Florida system by the Florida Department of Education, however, did find a few problems in the system. The evaluation was based on a review of policy documents and evidence gathered from interviews and observations. The study focused on three aspects of the system, the way in which policy is supported through resource allocation, the way in which the new programs are developed and operated, and the effectiveness of governing by the collaboration of several institutions. Two of these areas, resource allocation and collaboration, were found to have a number of problems. 83 In regard to resource allocation, there were several problems cited. Some of the problems were related to the uncertainties of interpreting new policies. But it was also found that, while there were some efforts within colleges of education to encourage faculty involvement in center activities, the overall higher education system seems to discourage these activities. The collaboration system was found to be generally successful, but there were barriers found to its success. They included geographic distance and, in one county, lack of confidence in the ability of university staff to function in a partnership relationship. The higher education institution in question, however, felt that districts were unwilling to accept the value of the 82 Section 231.600 Florida Statutes. 83 Florida Department of Education, oj>. cit., pp. 1-59. 42 independence of a scholarly perspective. 84 Thus Florida has taken major steps to establish a state-wide system for teacher professional development. That system, as does the federal program, draws from the concepts of the British system, especially the concept of teacher control. With the exception of a few problems, that system seems to be working well in Florida. In this portion of the search of the literature, it has been seen that government policy has been developed in the last few years in the area of teacher professional development. This policy has been designed to systematically provide teacher professional development at the macro, or governmental unit, level. The process of developing teacher professional development policy is not completed, however. There continue to be many unresolved issues. Some Important Issues Related to Teacher Professional Development Policy In order to develop teacher professional development policy, it is important for policy makers to understand the issues related to teacher professional development. There are several issues of impor­ tance to the development of teacher professional development policy. This portion of the review of the literature will focus on some of those issues. Basic to an understanding of teacher professional development issues is an awareness of the different perspectives that exist regard­ ing the purposes and concepts of teacher professional development. Each different perspective on teacher professional development will 43 suggest different policy options to accomplish the desired goals of that perspective. Various writers have described differing perspec­ tives on teacher professional development. One writer, Vincent R. Rogers, contrasts what he calls an individualistic, experiential approach to a "learn about" approach: We need, I think, teacher education programs at all levels that: 1. Allow for the total personal development of the individual as a human being and as a professional. There is more to becoming a good teacher than the accumulation of a set of skills. Teachers need to express— to feel— to write— to dance— to move— to create— in nonthreatening, unpressured situations. Teachers need to rid themselves of the idea that "I cannot do therefore I teach." 2. Allow ample time for teachers to experience— not merely "learn about."®® Another writer, Jackson, contrasts the perspective of teacher profes­ sional development as repair and remediation with teacher professional development as growth. He states: The first of the two perspectives from which the business of inservice training might be viewed is found inthe notions of repair and remediation. For this reason I have chosen to call it the "defect" point of view. It begins with the assumption that something is wrong with the way practicing teachers now operate and the purpose of in-service training is toset them straight— to repair their defects so to speak.®” Jackson goes on to add: At the heart of the defect conception of in-service training is the belief that education is a rapidly developing field in which old ways of doing things are constantly being replaced by new 85 Vincent R. Rogers, "Why Teachers Centers in the U.S.?," Educational Leadership 33 (March, 1976):412. 86 Philip W. Jackson, "Old Dogs and New Tricks: Observations on Continuing Education of Teachers," in Louis J. Rubin, Improving Inservice Education (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1971), p. 21. 44 and better ways. This belief is reflected in the salience and high prestige accorded the research worker in education.87 Jackson then contrasts what he calls the "defect" position to a growth approach: The point of view I now would like to contrast with the one just described begins with the assumption that teaching is a complex and multifaceted activity about which there is more to know than can ever be known by any one person. From this point of view the motive for learning more about teaching is not to repair a per­ sonal inadequacy as a teacher but to seek greater fulfillment as a practitioner of the art. Consequently, I have chosen to callgg this point of view the "growth" approach to inservice training. Another writer that takes a growth approach to teacher professional development is Holly. Her dissertation research supports the growth concept of teacher professional development. 89 She found that teachers* growth activities were continuous and ongoing; and those activities included such activities as attending church, reading, interacting with other teachers, and participation in university classes in which teachers share ideas and experiences. 90 Yet another set of contrasting perspectives on teacher professional development is provided by Albert Shanker, President of the American Federation of Teachers: To begin with, we have to decide whether inservice development for teachers should be viewed as some kind of whip to crack incompetents into shape, or whether it is preferable to assume 87 Ibid., p. 22 . 88 Ibid., p. 26. 89 Mary Louise Hulbert Holly, "A Conceptual Framework for Personal-Professional Growth: Implications for Inservice Education" (Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1977). 90Ibid., pp. 206-207. 45 that teachers want to improve their performance by learning more.91 But, as Devaney points out: . . . almost every discussion of teachers' centers as a model for federally supported inservice evokes a challenge as to what a center can do about "all those others": rank-and-file teachers whom the challenger characterizes as unwilling to improve. g2 Several incentives to such teachers need to materialize . . . . In Michigan, it appears that the efforts to develop a state­ wide system of teacher professional development has been largely influ­ enced by the concepts of incentives and remediation. In a Program Revision Request for Professional Development funds, the Michigan Department of Education stated: Presently 75% of Michigan teachers have completed university work for the permanent certificate and 75% are at the top of their local salary scale. Therefore, there are fewer incentives for certified personnel to engage in inservice activities. 3 And in testimony presented on behalf of John Porter before the United States Congressional Committee on Education and Labor, the following perspective on teacher professional development was set forth: New federal and state mandated programs, new methodologies, changing school populations with multicultural needs, and the knowledge explosion have created a situation in which teachers 91 John Ryor, Albert Shanker, and J. T. Sandefur, "Three Per­ spectives on Inservice Education," Journal of Teacher Education 30 (January/February, 1979):16. 92 Kathleen Devaney, "Warmth, Concreteness, Time, and Thought in Teachers' Learning," in Kathleen Devaney (ed.), Essays on Teachers' Centers (San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977), pp. 23-24. 93 Michigan Department of Education, Program Revision Request— "Four State Project to Develop a System or Systems to Improve Student Achievement Through Staff Development" (unpublished form, Form PRR-2, FY 1978-79), p. 2. 46 must continually update skills and knowledge to meet the demands of society and respond to expectations of parents and students.94 Thus, there are differing perspectives on the purposes and concepts of teacher professional development. Writers wrestle with two basically different approaches to teacher professional development. One approach sees teacher professional development as something that originates outside the teacher (incentives, a "whip-to-crack," remedi­ ation, updating). The other approach sees teacher professional devel­ opment as something which originates within the teacher, as growth. Comments by the Michigan Department of Education suggests that Michi­ gan's current efforts to devise a teacher professional development program originates from an external perspective of teacher professional development. Another important issue for policy makers is: what is existing teacher professional development like? There is considerable discussion in the literature on the nature of the existing system, most of it negative. Miller comments: "Overall the results of staff development have been disappointing." 95 Another writer, National Education Associ­ ation President, John Ryor, says: "What we have now continues to be vaguely defined and haphazardly run, . . And another author, McLaughlin concurs: 94 John W. Porter, Testimony presented to the Congressional Committee on Education and Labor, Representative William D. Ford, Chairman (Wayne County Intermediate School District, Wayne, Michigan, May 25, 1979). ^William C. Miller, "What's Wrong with In-Service Education? It's Topless!," Educational Leadership 35 (October, 1977):31. ^Ryor, Shanker and Sandefur, 0£. cit., p. 13. 47 While staff development is increasingly recognized as a critical concern for school districts— not just a frill or an extra— there also seems to be consensus that what we have now in the way of staff development isn't very good. Teachers, administrators, researchers, and bureaucrats all agree that current staff devel­ opment or inservice programs are irrelevant, ineffective, and generally a waste of time.®' And another NEA writer, Roy Edelfelt, adds: Inservice education has been the neglected stepchild of teacher training . . . inservice education for teachers remains a wasteland of evening, Saturday, and summer courses mandated by school dis­ tricts and state departments of education . . . inservice education has been inadequate. It has not met teacher needs.®® Writers on the subject assign responsibility for the many prob­ lems attributed to teacher professional development to a variety of institutions. Governmental agencies responsible for developing and implementing inservice programs are described as being either ineffec­ tive or inappropriately intrusive. Regarding state and federal govern­ ment's role in teacher education in general, Atkins comments: It is unlikely that a chapter in a book on teacher education would have been devoted to governmental roles before 1960. Only since that date have both state and federal activity in teacher educa­ tion become intrusive and highly visible.®9 Specifically, Atkin feels that in all areas of education, including teacher education, the United States Office of Education has not been effective in implementing educational reform: 97 Milbry Wallin McLaughlin, "Pygmalion in the School District: Issues for Staff Development Programs," in Kathleen Devaney (ed.), Essays on Teachers' Centers (San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977), p. 76. 98 Roy A. Edelfelt, "Inservice Education of Teachers: Priority for the Next Decade," Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Summer, 1974):250. 99 J. Myron Atkin, "Governmental Roles," in Donald T. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973), p. 73. 48 The Office of Education is held in particularly low repute in Washington, both in the executive branch and in Congress . . . . It often seems as if the Office of Education does not recognize what it takes to modify American education. The result has been one disappointment after another for Congress and the executive branch. State government is also viewed with skepticism. In another essay on teacher education, Drummond discusses the role of the state department of education in teacher education: In using metaphors to describe or assign character to organizations they observe, people often like to use animal referants, usually sleeping animals; for example, sleeping dogs, sleeping camels, and sleeping lions. 1 would like to suggest that state departments of education are like sleeping whales. Any one in the water recog­ nizes their potential power, but seldom worries about being eaten. After all, whales eat only very little things in very large gulps. Few people notice the size of whales unless they are dead or beached, or unless someone has to do something about them.*®1 Drummond goes on to argue that the state must allow local school pro­ fessional staff and their clients to create and carry out their own educational program, and closes by adding: Dead whales are not too bad if you are in the blubber-rendering business, and the carcasses are near the pot. If this is not the situation, however, the wiser course might be to entice sick or sleeping whales into deeper, more salubrious, waters . . . . I am told most whales do not know how much potential power they have. I, for one, would just as soon not tell them even when we wake them up .^®2 Even more than government, higher education has been criticized for its role in teacher professional development. One of the most out­ spoken critics of higher education's role in teacher education has 100 Ibid., p. 78. ^William H. Drummond, "Role of State Department of Education," in Donald J. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973), p. 84. 102Ibid., p. 99. 49 been James D. Koerner. In his book, the Mis Education of American Teachers, he maintains that teachers' education is poor because: . . . a kind of Gresham's law is always at work in Education, in which good teachers, good students, good courses, and good text books are driven out, or never allowed to enter, by bad ones.103 Devaney also feels that higher education does not constructively con­ tribute to classroom teaching. She comments that "the grad courses at the university are geared to advancing the teacher out of the class­ room . . . ,"104 And in Michigan, one argument advanced on behalf of an expanded state system of teacher professional development is the inadequacy of higher education. The Michigan Department of Education states in its request for professional development funds that there is "dissatisfaction of educational personnel with courses taught for credit by institutions of higher education. However, there are also those who see important positive results from higher education teacher programs. In discussing teacher education Blanchard states: . . . the quality of teacher preparation nationally has never been better. The vitality, courage, and skill of teacher insti­ tutions graduates committed to serving in a city school system is in remarkable positive contrast to that of even a decade ago.1°^ 103 James D. Koerner, The Mis Education of American Teachers (Baltimore: Penquin Books, 1965), p. 69. 104 Devaney, 0£. cit., p. 16. ^ ’’Michigan Department of Education, op. cit. *^Robert W. Blanchard, "New Weapons in an Old War," in Donald J. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973), pp. 66-67. 50 And in research conducted by Waskin, it was found that those most responsible for the establishment of teacher centers to foster improved teacher development were university personnel and local classroom teachers. 107 One critic, Friedenberg, points to the entire public education system, and cautions against expecting any reforms to make significant educational improvements until fundamental changes are made in the distribution of power within the educational system. He states: Teacher education programs are literally the creatures of the public school.system, regardless of their college or university affiliations; and the central function of the public school system in a time of crisis is to preserve itself and the jobs and pre­ requisites of its staff. The growth of unionism in the schools . . . demonstrates fairly clearly that the fundamental concern of those who operate the schools is to keep their jobs and keep those jobs from demanding more than they can contribute to them, . . . If teachers strike . . . holidays can be abolished and the school year extended to make up the lost time. If students strike, they are truants. They must be there and are enjoined to ask not what the schools can do for them but, rather, what they can do for the schools. There is nothing unusually iniquitous about this; it is largely true of every institution that serves a captive clientele. But that it is true should set limits to the enthusiasm for liberal reforms that do not alter the distribution of power within the institutions. Friedenberg calls for a change in the status of students as the means to effect educational reform. His suggested changes include changes in 107 Yvonne Fisher Waskin, "The Teacher Center Movement in the United States and Its Implications for Teacher Education" (unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1976), p. 109. 108 Edgar Z. Friedenberg, "Critique of Current Practice," in Donald J, McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education (San Francisco Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1977), pp. 38-39. 51 compulsory attendance laws, unionization of students, and wider establishment of alternative schools. 109 Another issue of importance to teacher professional development policy is teacher perceptions of, and receptivity to, teacher profes­ sional development. Any system devised by policy makers to involve teachers will need to be perceived by teachers as being worthwhile; otherwise their participation will be only superficial if it is required, and nonexistent if it is not required. Many writers feel that an important issue from the teachers point of view is the right of teachers to be involved in planning their own professional develop­ ment experiences. Many writers indicate that teachers would benefit more, and/or be more receptive to, professional development if they are actively involved in planning or choosing the activities. Accord­ ing to Ryor, in regard to solving educational problems, including the problem of staff development; "central to the resolution of many of those problems is the opportunity for teachers to be directly involved in developing programs for s e l f - r e n e w a l . J . M. Crosby, a teacher, writes in reference to teacher centers; "placing program determination in the control of teachers is essential if the center is to respond to teacher-discerned needs." 111 However, research conducted to date presents conflicting evi­ dence regarding the importance of teacher involvement in planning 109 Ibid., p. 39. **^John Ryor, "Teacher Centers," editorial in Todays Educa­ tion 65 (April/May, 1979);5. Michael Crosby, "A Teacher Looks at Teaching Centers and Educational Reform," Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):34. 52 their professional development activities. Research Ainsworth con­ ducted suggests that "teachers want a structured program of other teachers presenting new and different ideas in a situation where choice and self-direction are not necessarily available." 112 The least fre­ quently mentioned teacher professional development qualities the 146 teachers interviewed for the study mentioned were "choice and selfdirection." 113 She comments, too, that; "whether teachers are capable of, or prepared for, self-diagnosis appears to be debatable." 114 On the other hand, in research conducted by Brimnt and Tollett, teachers responding to a "Teacher Attitude Toward In-Service Education Inventory" gave their strongest endorsement to the statement: "The teacher should have the opportunity to select the kind of in-service activities which he feels will strengthen his professional c o m p e t e n c e . A n d in its 1975 nationwide poll, NEA Research asked teachers to respond to several questions related to teacher inservice, including preferred professional development planners. Only 24.7 percent of the respondents preferred having each teacher plan his or her own inservice, but 56.1 percent indicated they preferred programs planned by a committee of teachers.**** And, in her dissertation research, Edwards found that her "results 112 Barbara A. Ainsworth, "Teachers Talk about Inservice Educa­ tion," JournaJ^jjjMte^ (Summer, 1976): 107. Ibid. 114t. .j Ibid. 115 Jack L. Brimm and Daniel J. Tollett, "How Do Teachers Feel About In-Service Education," Educational Leadership 31 (March, 1974):523. 116 NEA Research, "Inservice Education," Todays Education 65 (March/April, 1976):16. 53 suggest strongly that teachers desire: input into decision-making in inservice education, relevant inservice for classroom application ,,117 » i • i However, in considering the part teachers are to play in planning their own professional development, possible problems must also be considered. Kaplan points out, in regard to teacher center professional development activities, that; "when centers have been entirely dominated by teachers, their programs have tended to become circular and impotent once the excitement of sharing ideas has run out." 118 Another possible problem that might be associated with the teacher being solely responsible for planning is the limitations role may place on teachers. Jaquith found that, in comparing teachers*, principals', and university specialists' perceptions of teachers' inservice needs, there were differences in the responses that were related to role position. 119 He points out that: Because of their day-to-day contact with the problems of operating in a junior high or middle school, teachers and principals assigned greater importance to practical competencies than did university specialists. The university specialists were more concerned about the personal needs and interests of students. 117 Patsy Kaye Dernberger Edwards, "Teachers' Perceptions of Present Practices, Process-Needs, Alternative Delivery Systems and Priority of Inservice Education" (unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1975), p. 221. 118 Leonard Kaplan, "Survival Talk for Educators— On Teacher Centers," Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):50. 119 Charles Ervan Jaquith, "An Analysis of Perceptions of Junior High/Middle School Teachers, Principals, and University Special ists Concerning Inservice Education" (unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1973). 54 This tended to be related to their graduate level backgrounds in social psychology,12^ Also, Angius found that teachers and principals differed in their perceptions regarding appropriate inservice education. 121 Thus, in regard to teachers' perceptions of, and receptivity to, professional development, it has been seen that the question of teachers choosing and planning their own professional development is an important, but unresolved, issue. Many writers 122 suggest a collaborative approach to teacher professional development as a means of addressing the issue of teacher involvement in professional devel­ opment planning. Bush and Enemark, for example, comment: Control and responsibility should be jointly held and equally shared in teacher education. This means that the control of teacher education by the colleges should be expanded into some of the areas traditionally controlled by the schools and that some of the responsibility for teacher education which has tradi­ tionally been borne by the colleges should be shared by the schools.123 120 Ibid., p. 196. 121 Dushan Angius, "The Appropriateness of Selected Inservice Education Practices as Perceived by Secondary School Educators" (unpub­ lished Ed.D. Thesis, University of the Pacific, 1974). 122 See, for example, Roy A, Edelfelt and E. Brooks Smith (eds.), Breakaway to Multidimensional Approaches: Integrating Curriculum Development and Inservice Education (Washington, D.C.: Association of Teacher Educators, 1978); E. Brooks Smith et al. (eds.), Partnership in Teacher Education (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Col­ leges for Teacher Education, 1967); and Janice F. Weaver, "Collabora­ tion: Why is Sharing the Turf So Difficult?," Journal of Teacher Education 30 (January/February, 1979):24-25. 123 Robert N. Bush and Peter Enemark, "Control and Respon­ sibility in Teacher Education," in Kevin Ryan (ed.), Teacher Education: The Seventy-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975), p. 292. 55 In applying this concept to policy development, King suggests that those who are responsible for developing public education policy should become more sensitive to teachers' perceptions of obstacles to their participation in professional development and create a more functional collaborative mechanism.12* For the purposes of presentation, the writers reviewed in this chapter were placed in one of four sections. The first part traced the development of evaluation research in relationship to educational policy making and discussed some of evaluation's important concepts. The last three portions of this chapter traced the history of teacher professional development in Michigan and then discussed issues and trends relating to professional development as government policy. In conclusion, it is apparent from the many books and articles reviewed that the issues related to developing a rational teacher pro­ fessional development policy are complex. Although there has been considerable discussion and research addressed to the problem of teacher professional development recently, it is clear that there are many unresolved policy issues. The ongoing debate at the state and federal level over teacher professional development continue to bring these unresolved issues to the forefront of educational policy issues. This study then, which is concerned with determining what the nature of the existing professional development system is, seems most timely. 124 Charles Thomas King, "Professional Development Needs as Perceived by Full-Time Teachers Not Pursuing Advanced Study and Factors Affecting Their Acceptance of Programs Designed to Meet Those Needs" (unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, 1978), p. 185. 56 In reviewing the literature, certain references were particu­ larly related to this study. Of importance in regard to the first research question is Rossi's discussion of parameter estimation of distributional characteristics as an important element in policyrelated research. Of relevance to the second research question are the writings of McLaughlin, Edelfelt, Miller, and Ryor who described teacher professional development, respectively, as "irrelevant," "inadequate," "disappointing," and "haphazardly run." Rogers, and his contrasting of the experiential approach to the "learn about" approach and Jackson and his comparison of the perspective of teacher profes­ sional development as growth with the perspective of teacher profes­ sional development as remediation were of relevance to the third research question. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY This chapter describes the rationale for the study, the research questions, the setting of the study, the selection of the samples, development of the instrument, collection of the data, treat­ ment of the data, and the limitations of the data. Rationale This study is conducted from the perspective of evaluation research theory. It is designed to address the state-level need for information that would be useful in policy decision making. Particu­ larly, this research addresses the need to evaluate what the distribu­ tion and nature of specific educational problems are. As Rivlin points out; "the first step in making public policy is to get a picture of what the problem is."* She points out that, as a result of federal level research using sample survey techniques and data processing improvements, we have much more detailed and useful information about social problems. 2 However, in the area of state-level educational issues, there is considerable need to gather this type of descriptive *Alice M. Rivlin, Systematic Thinking for Social Action (Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution^ 1971), p. 9. 2 Ibid. 57 58 data. The purpose of this study is to collect that type of descriptive, state-wide, systematic information about the tax-supported teacher pro­ fessional development system that would be useful to policy makers. To gather this information, a survey instrument was designed that focused on the two major elements of the teacher professional development system; the provider of teacher professional development services and the recipi­ ents of those services. Both aspects of the system are important to this study because the nature of each, and the interaction of both, are the essence of any teacher professional development system. A success­ ful professional development system requires the constructive involve­ ment of both the providers and the recipients. The service providers studied were those that are tax supported and included local school districts, intermediate school districts, higher education institutions, and state supported teacher professional development centers. Teachers studied were those that have working relationships with students. Research Questions There are three primary research questions this research is designed to answer in regard to the nature of the teacher professional development system. 1. What professional development activities are currently avail­ able in which state teachers participate? a. How many professional development activities have teachers attended in one year? b. What is the total number of contact hours teachers have had in professional development activities in one year? c. Is there a difference in the availability of professional development services between areas of the state? d. Is there a difference in the availability of professional development services in school districts of different sizes? What is the nature of the current delivery system of those professional development activities attended by teachers? a. What organizations provided those services? b. What are some of the attributes of those professional development services as perceived by teachers? c. Is there a difference in the way in which teachers perceive those professional development services in different areas of the state? d. Is there a difference in the way in which teachers perceive those professional development services in school districts of different size? e. What teacher contract provisions are there that affect pro­ fessional development? What are the perceived needs of teachers and their receptivity to more professional development? a. What attributes of professional development activities are important to teachers? b. Is there a need or willingness on the part of teachers to participate in an expanded professional development system? 60 c. Is there a difference in the perceived need of teachers in different areas of the state? d. Is there a difference in the perceived need of teachers in school districts of different size? Setting of the Study The participants in this study were teachers in the state of Michigan. Two groups of teachers were sampled. One group of teachers sampled was teachers who teach in the Detroit School District. The other group sampled was all teachers in Michigan that did not teach in Detroit. Detroit was sampled separately for two main reasons. (1) The first professional development center was established in Detroit and it is possible that it may have made some differences in teachers' per­ ceived needs by the time the survey was conducted. (2) Detroit is unique enough to warrant looking at it as a special case. Detroit has, according to State Department of Education data, 233,370 students as compared to the next largest district in Michigan, Flint, with 38,086. And Detroit students' special educational problems are demonstrated by the fact that they compare unfavorably in relationship to the rest of the state on every objective on the Michigan Educational Assessment 3 Program test. 3 Detroit Public Schools, "Budget Presentation: Court-Ordered Educational Components of the Desegregation Plan," June 9, 1978, Exhibit C. 61 Selection of Samples The purpose of the sampling procedures was to have each be as representative as possible of each sampling frame from which the sample is drawn within cost limitations. As Borg and Gall point out, sampling involves the selection of a portion of a population as representative 4 of that population. To accomplish this goal, the sampling technique should assure that each individual in the defined population has an equal chance of being included. To this end, two systematic random samples of teachers were drawn. One sample was selected from Detroit teachers and one from the rest of the state. The sampling frames for these surveys were: (1) all the teachers listed on the Department of Education's 1977-78 Professional Register, with the exclusion of the A-Administrator category and the NY-school Nurse category that teach in the Detroit School District; and (2) all teachers on the Department of Education's Professional Register with the exclusion of the AAdministrator category and the NY-School Nurse category that teach anywhere in Michigan except in Detroit. to have n equal approximately 1,000. The Detroit sample was drawn The actual Detroit sample drawn was 984, and with some of the information needed to develop mailing labels missing, the actual number of Detroit teachers surveyed was 977. The rest of the state was sampled to have n equal approximately 2,000. The actual sample drawn was 2,015, with 2,001 the actual sampling after mailing labels were developed. 4 Walter Borg and Meridith D. Gall, Educational Research: An Introduction (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1963), p. 115. 62 Development of the Instrument The questionnaire used for this research project was a survey instrument designed specifically for this project by the researcher.5 The purpose of this research project is to describe the teacher pro­ fessional development system; and as Babbie points out, one of the purposes of survey research is description.® Thus, a survey question­ naire was designed to collect descriptive information on three basic questions: (1) What is available? like? (2) What are the available services and (3) What are teachers' perceptions of professional develop­ ment and their own needs? For the purpose of instrument design and continuity, items on the questionnaire that relate to the three basic questions were interwoven throughout the questionnaire. The procedures for developing the questionnaire consisted of three phases. The first phase involved discussing teacher professional development issues with interested educators, including Department of Education staff and state colleges of education personnel, and reviewing written documents, position statements, and related literature. From phase one a list of attributes that was held by general wisdom to apply to the state's professional development was developed and areas of dis­ agreement were noted. The second phase involved the development, 7 administering, and analysis of an open-ended questionnaire. Two groups of elementary and secondary teachers, one set urban and one set rural, 5See Appendix B. ®Earl R. Babbie, Survey Research Methods (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1973), p. 59. 7 See Appendix C. 63 were asked to respond to the questionnaire. The third phase consisted of developing a draft questionnaire based on information gathered in phase one and two. The teachers' responses to the open-ended question­ naire were used to develop the response options on the survey instru­ ment. The questionnaire was designed to be (1) understandable, (2 ) appealing enough to the respondent to promote its completion and return, and (3) efficient in the use of the respondent's time. The questionnaire was field tested with teachers attending summer courses at Michigan State University in regard to its comprehensibility, format, and completion time. The instrument was then reviewed by interested educators and researchers and modified as appropriate. Collection of the Data The survey instrument, with a mailable, postage paid cover which also included a cover letter, was mailed in early September, 1978. The color of the cover indicated which sample the recipient teacher was from (blue was from outstate, yellow from Detroit). approximately 3,000 instruments were mailed bulk rate. The A first class follow-up letter was mailed to the entire list of persons drawn for both samples approximately a month later. Unfortunately, it was dis­ covered after the mailing that school districts would not necessarily (and legally did not have to) deliver bulk rate mail to their teachers, nor do federal mail rules provide for the return of undelivered mail to senders. It was found that Detroit school district had not delivered at least seventy-eight of their teachers' questionnaires. And, in response to the follow-up letter, which was mailed first class, twentytwo Detroit teachers called to indicate that they had never received a 64 questionnaire and to request one. Also, two Detroit questionnaires were returned from persons that were inappropriate to the sample (one admin­ istrator and one pre-school teacher). Thus, the total number of Detroit K-12 teachers receiving the questionnaire was no more than 897. Since there is no way of knowing how many were actually received, it is possible that the number of teachers receiving questionnaires was less than 897. From the non-Detroit sample, fourteen questionnaires were returned undelivered and sixteen of those responding were not appropri­ ate to the sample. Thirty-four teachers called and requested a ques­ tionnaire in response to the follow-up letter. In all 1,971, or less, K-12 teachers in the non-Detroit sample received a survey instrument. Treatment of the Data The subjects of the study responded on a self-coded survey instrument and results were key punched directly onto data cards. A verification process was employed as a precaution against errors in key punching the cards. Prior to key punching, each instrument was read and edited as necessary for accuracy. The investigator then developed a program for processing the data. Two types of data are presented in the analysis of data. type of data is biographical data about the respondents. are used to present profiles of the respondents. analyzed by strata of the sample. These data The second type of data is used to answer the three basic research questions. are summarized in percentages and means. One Those data When appropriate, data were Data for each research question are presented in three categories, Detroit, outstate, and statewide. The statewide data were produced by randomly sampling the proportionately larger Detroit sample to achieve the ratio of Detroit respondents to the Detroit sampling frame as was the case in the outstate sample. Also, further analysis of research question lc (Is there a difference in the availability of professional development services between areas of the state?) and Id (Is there a difference in the avail­ ability of professional development services in school districts of different sizes?) was conducted by the use of analysis of variance. Research question lc was investigated by two hypotheses. Hypothesis one was: The number of activities teachers participate in annually is equally distributed among four different areas of the state (Northern Michigan, Upper Peninsula, Southern Michigan, and Detroit). The hypothesis was tested with a one way, fixed effects ANOVA. Stated statistically the null hypothesis tested was: and Hj = m1 t u2 t y3 f u4 Hypothesis two was: The number of hours teachers participate in profes­ sional development annually is equally distributed among four different areas of the state. and Hj = ^ y2 The statistical hypothesis was: u3 u4 Research question Id was also further analyzed by testing two hypoth­ eses. Hypothesis one for question Id was: The number of activities teachers participate in professional development is equally distributed 66 among five different categories of school district sizes. The hypothesis tested was: H0 = yl = y2 = y3 = y4 = yS and Hj = y2 p3 p4 / yg The second hypothesis for question Id was: The number of hours teachers participate in professional development annually is equally distributed among five different categories of school sizes, or: and H0 = yi = y2 = y3 = y4 = y5 Hj = v 1 t y2 f y3 i y4 t yg Limitation of the Data— Nonresponse The most serious limitations of any study using mailed question­ naires is nonresponse. For this study the response for the non-Detroit sample was 849 and for Detroit it was 311. Thus the rate of return, outstate was 43 percent and for Detroit it was 35 percent. Statistical sampling techniques are based on the assumption that 100 percent of those actually sampled respond. When that is the case, and all other rigorous research techniques are observed, the resulting data can be reported as a fairly accurate representation of the entire population from which the sample was drawn. If that is not the case, as it seldom is when mailed questionnaires are used, the question arises as to whether or not there is a systematic bias to the nonresponse. When there is less than 100 percent response rate, it is neces­ sary to attempt to consider if the nonresponses occurred in a random fashion. In this study, it can be hypothesized that there are probably 67 two primary factors that would account for nonresponse. The first factor is the possibility that many of the questionnaires were not delivered to the individual teacher, and it can probably be assumed that nondelivery would be random. However, the second possible factor, lack of interest, could bias the response. There is no way to knowif the nonrespondents in this survey were the result of lack of interest or not. However, research conducted by the Survey Research Center in Ann Arbor found respondents needing several contacts to elicit a response to a mailed questionnaire had less interest in the subjectof g the questionnaire than did those who responded quickly. Thus, based on the Survey Research Center's findings, it may be possible to assume that, if there is a bias to the nonresponses, it would be toward those not interested in teacher professional development. In Detroit's case, there is one other possible factor affecting nonresponse. Detroit schools have a policy requiring researchers to obtain permission from the central office to conduct research in the school system. If the permission is not obtained and teachers officially notified of that, the teachers are not expected to respond to the research instrument. In this case, although the communication regarding the research was made to the district over a month before the questionnaires were mailed, the teachers were not notified until after they had received them and most of them had been returned. Thus, in Detroit's case, it is probably even more likely that those responding had a stronger interest in professional development than did those not responding. Although it g Marjorie N. Donald, "Implications of Nonresponse for the Interpretation of Mail Questionnaire Data," The Public Opinion Quarterly 24:99-114. 68 cannot necessarily be assumed that the nonrespondents were not interested, since the district's policy would influence most teachers to not respond. In considering the problem of nonresponse, it is helpful to compare the characteristics of the respondents to the characteristics of the population from which the sample was drawn. Such a comparison reveals that the survey respondents had a little more teaching experi­ ence than did all state teachers. According to Department of Education data, the average state teacher for the year sampled had eleven years of teaching experience, whereas the average survey respondent had thir­ teen years experience. Further, of the total state teacher population, approximately 66 percent have either a permanent, 30 hour continuing, or vocational full authorized certificate. But, over 72 percent of the survey respondents fall into one of those categories. The extent to which nonresponse limits the data analysis varies from question to question. Analysis of questions designed to ascertain the availability of services will be less limited than will questions designed to determine teachers' receptivity to expanding the profes­ sional development system. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA The purpose of this study was to examine, on a systematic, state­ wide basis, the existing teacher professional development system. Two major elements of the teacher professional development system were explored; the service providers and the service recipients. The pro­ viders were examined in regard to the availability, distribution and nature of services provided. The recipients were investigated with respect to their perceived needs and receptivity to professional devel­ opment. These two components were investigated by collecting data to answer three basic research questions. The purpose of this chapter is to present the findings and analysis of the data collected for this study. Included first is a description of the characteristics of the respondents. The subsequent data respond to the three research questions: (1) What professional development activities are currently available in which state teachers participate? (2) What is the nature of the current delivery system of those professional development activities attended by teachers? (3) What are the perceived needs of teachers and their receptivity to more professional development? Each basic research question is accom­ panied by a set of questions designed to augment and delineate the main question. 69 70 Characteristics of Respondents In this section of the data analysis, the sample population is presented as a composite statewide sample. The sample population is described with respect to various professional attributes. The data are presented in Tables 1 through 6 . Table 1 presents the respondents' area of teaching responsibility. respondents were teaching. achieved by the subjects. respondents possess. Table 2 shows the levels at which the Table 3 indicates the level of education Table 4 shows the type of certification Table S presents the number of respondents teach­ ing in their major or minor area. Table 6 indicates the size of school districts in which the respondents teach. The data also showed that the respondents' mean number of years teaching experience was 12.8 years. It should be noted that, since the respondents did not always answer all questions, the number of respondents is not the same on each table. Respondents' Teaching Responsibilities In response to the question: "Would you please indicate what your area of teaching responsibility is? Check the one area you teach in most.," it was found that the largest group of respondents were teachers in self-contained elementary classrooms. Of the 933 subjects answering that question, 303, or 32.5 percent, were self-contained elementary teachers. The second largest group was comprised of counselors, special education teachers, and reading consultants. That group consisted of 188 teachers, or 20.2 percent, of the respondents. The third largest group, with 138 or 14.8 percent, was made up of language arts or social science teachers, and the fourth largest group was math or science teachers with 109 (11.7 percent) teachers. The 71 Table 1.— Respondents' Primary Area of Teaching Responsibility. Response = 933 Teaching Area Total n Percent Self-contained elementary 303 32.5 Counselor, Special education, or reading 188 20.2 20 2.1 Language arts or social studies 138 14.8 Math or science 109 11.7 Physical education 34 3.6 Music or art 55 5.9 Home economics, industrial arts, or business 77 8.3 9 1.0 Librarian or media specialist Foreign language Totals 933 100 .1 * *Note: Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add to 100 . 72 Table 2.--Respondents’ Teaching Level. Total Response = 931 Teaching Level n Early elementary (K-3) 199 21.4 Late elementary (4-6) 131 14.1 All elementary (K-6) 89 9.6 Middle school (6-8 ) 86 9.2 Junior high (7-9) 97 10.4 261 28.0 All secondary (7-12) 24 2.6 All grades (K-12) 44 4.7 931 100.0 Senior high (9-12) Totals Percent Table 3.— Respondents' Educational Level . Total Response = 935 Education Level n Percent Less than BA or BS 9 1.0 Bachelor's degree 32 3.4 Bachelor's plus coursework 343 36.7 Master's degree 225 24.1 Master's plus coursework 287 30.7 32 3.4 7 0.7 935 100.0 Education specialist Ph.D. Totals 73 Table 4.--Respondents' Type of Certification. Certification Total Response = 934 n Percent Provisional 122 13.1 Permanent 614 65.7 Continuing 124 13.3 43 4.6 Annual vocational authorization 6 0.6 Temporary vocational authorization 3 0.3 13 1.4 Permit 1 0.1 Other 8 0.9 934 100.0 30-hour continuing Full vocational authorization Totals Table S.— Respondents' Teaching Responsibilities in Major or Minor Area. Total Response = 908 n Percent Major 769 84.6 Minor 121 13.3 18 2.0 Teaching Area No Totals 908 99.9* *Note: Percentages are rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. 74 Table 6 .— Size of School Districts in Respondents' Work. Response =924 District Size Total n 50,000 or over Percent 81 8.8 10,000 to 49,999 223 24.1 3,500 to 9,999 222 24.0 1,500 to 3,499 243 26.3 Less than 1,500 97 10.5 Don't know 58 6.3 924 100.0 Totals next largest group, home economics, business education or industrial arts teachers, had seventy-seven respondents or 8.3 percent of all those responding to the question. of music and art teachers. The sixth largest group consisted That group had fifty-five respondents or 5.9 percent of those responding to that question. The seventh largest group, physical education teachers, had thirty-four (3.6 percent) teachers responding. The eighth and ninth ranked groups were librarians or media specialists with twenty (2.1 percent) and foreign language teachers with nine (1.0 percent) respondents. Respondents* Teaching Level In response to: "At what level do you teach most of the time?," the largest number of teachers indicated they were senior high teachers. There were 261 teachers, of 931 answering that question (or 28.0 percent) that were senior high teachers. The next two largest groups were early 75 elementary with 199 (21.4 percent) and late elementary with 131 (14.1 percent). The fourth largest category of respondents was junior high which accounted for 10.4 percent (97) of the respondents. Eighty-nine, or 9.6 percent, of the respondents, indicated they taught all elementary grades. Middle school grades were taught by eighty-six (9.2 percent) of the respondents. And the categories with the least number of respon­ dents were all grades with forty-four, or 4.7 percent, of the respondents and all secondary with twenty-four, or 2.6 percent, of the respondents. Respondents* Educational Level Teachers were asked to indicate their educational level. hundred thirty-five subjects did so. Nine Of those 935, only 1 percent, or nine teachers, had less than a B.A. or a B.S., and only thirty-two (3.4 percent) possessed the bachelor's with no education beyond that. Those subjects with a bachelor's plus coursework consisted of 36.7 percent (343) of those responding to the question; and 225 respondents, or 24.1 percent, possessed master's degrees. Two hundred eighty-seven respon­ dents (30.7 percent) had completed coursework beyond the master's. And, a total of thirty-nine teachers indicated they had obtained either the educational specialist degree or doctorate. Thus, 894 or 95.6 percent of the teachers responding indicated they had some graduate work. And, 551 or 58.9 percent of the subjects had at least a master's degree. Type of Certification Subjects were asked to respond to the question: "Would you please indicate your certification standing? Check the one category 76 that applies to the certification that you are currently using to teach." There were 934 responses to that question. Of those responses, 122 (13.1 percent) were in the provisional category, 614 (65.7 percent) in the permanent group, and 124 (13.3 percent) continuing. Also, forty- three teachers, or 4.6 percent, indicated they were working with a 30-hour continuing certificate, six, or .6 percent, with an annual vocational authorization, three (.3 percent) with a temporary vocational authorization, and thirteen (1.4 percent) with full vocational author­ ization. One respondent indicated they were teaching with a permit and eight placed themselves in the "other" category. In all, 71.7 percent of the respondents had met all state requirements to achieve either permanent, 30-hour continuing or full vocational authorization. Major or Minor Area The teachers were asked to respond to the question: "Is your primary teaching responsibility in the area of your minor or major certification?" Of the 909 responding to that question, 84.6 percent or 769 indicated they were teaching in their major area. There were 121 (13.3 percent) teachers that indicated they were teaching in their minor area. There were also eighteen teachers, or 2 percent, who indicated they were not teaching in either their major or minor area. Size of School District Respondents were also asked to indicate the approximate size of the school district in which they taught. Respondents in the state­ wide sample indicated that 8.8 percent of the 924 responding to that 77 question worked in a district with a student population of 50,000 or more. Also, 24.1 percent worked in districts with a student population of 10,000 to 49,999; and another 24.0 percent worked in districts with a student body of 3,500 to 9,999. The remaining respondents were dis­ tributed between districts with 1,500 students (10.5 percent) and dis­ tricts with less than 1,500. Another 6.3 percent of the responding teachers indicated that they did not know the size of their district. Available Professional Development Activities in Which State Teachers Participate The first basic research question was concerned with the avail­ ability of teacher professional development services throughout the state. Data for specific questions related to that basic question were gathered to ascertain some information about the way in which those services are distributed statewide. The data pertaining to each of the four questions have been analyzed and are presented below. Number of Activities Attended The first question designed to gather information about the availability of services pertained to the number of activities respon­ dents had attended. Data related to that question are presented in Tables 7 and 8 . In Table 7 the number of teachers indicating that they had participated in professional development activities are shown. In Table 8 the average number of activities in which teachers were involved is set forth. Statewide, 77 percent of the respondents had participated in professional development activities. The highest rate of participation was in Detroit with a 90.4 percent participation rate. Fewer of the 78 Table 7.--Teachers Participating in Professional Development Activities. Detroit n = 311 Participation in Activities Yes No Totals n % 281 90.4 30 311 Outstate n * 849 n Statewide n = 944 % n % 641 75.5 727 77.0 9.6 208 24.5 217 23.0 100.0 849 100.0 944 100.0 Table 8 .— Number of Activities in Which Teachers Participated. Detroit Outstate Statewide n Unit of Analysis n mean n Respondent 311 5.8 849 3.0 944 3.3 Professional Development Participant 275 6.6 631 4.1 715 4.3 mean mean 79 non-Detroit teachers had participated in professional development than had the Detroit teachers. The percent of those teachers participating in professional development was 75.5. However, in both cases most teachers had participated in professional development activities. In Detroit's case the participation was almost universal for those teachers responding. Several Detroit teachers provided additional written com­ ments pointing out that their participation was mandated by a court order related to the problems of racial segregation. The number of activities in which teachers participated were analyzed from two perspectives. dents. The first was in terms of all respon­ Statewide, for those teachers responding to the questionnaire the mean number of activities per teacher was 3.3. However, that number for Detroit respondents was 5.8 whereas for non-Detroit respon­ dents it was only 3.0. The second perspective from which the number of professional development activities were analyzed was participants only. When only those responses of teachers that had participated in professional development were analyzed, it was seen that statewide the mean number of activities per teacher was 4.3. For Detroit the mean number of activities was 6.6 and for non-Detroit it was 4.1. In sum, it is indicated by data collected on the subject of activities teachers attend that teacher professional development is available to a large number of those teachers responding to the survey both on a statewide basis and in Detroit. However, more Detroit teachers have received professional development services than have those teachers in the rest of the state sample. Not only are more Detroit teachers receiving professional development services, but those 80 that are receiving those services receive more per teacher than do non-Detroit respondents. Number of Hours of Professional Development The second question developed to explore the availability of professional development services pursued data related to the number of hours teachers annually participate in professional development. Data related to hours are presented in Tables 9 and 10. Table 9 is used to present the average number of hours teachers participated in professional development. In Table 10, data are presented that compare the average number of hours teachers attended professional development services from each of the service providers. It is seen by the data presented in Table 9 that subjects in the statewide sample had, on the average, 33.7 hours of professional development in one year. Detroit teachers' greater involvement in professional development is also reflected in the fact that their average number of hours spent in professional development was 48.6 in contrast to the 30.7 hours for non-Detroit teachers. Average hours Table 9.— Number of Hours Spent in Teacher Professional Development. Detroit Outstate Statewide Unit of Analysis n mean n mean n mean Respondent 311 48.6 849 30.7 947 33.7 Professional Development Participant 269 56.2 619 42.1 701 45.4 Table 10.— Hours of Professional Development Participation by Service Provider. Mean Hours Unit of Analysis Local Respondents Professional Development Participant Intermediate College State Detroit n = 311 22.4 11.4 17.2 4.5 Outstate n = 849 7.1 3.6 19.8 0.1 Statewide n = 944 8.6 3.5 20.6 0.9 Detroit n = 269 31.5 17.6 71.3 19.8 Outstate n = 619 11.9 68.8 11.9 12.1 72.4 23.3 Statewide n = 701 14.0 16.6 82 were also analyzed for teachers that had indicated they participated in professional development. In that analysis it is seen that the statewide group had spent 45.4 hours in professional development, Detroit teachers 56.2 hours, and non-Detroit teachers 42.1 hours. A further analysis of the data related to hours of participation was conducted by investigating the hours provided by the four taxsupported service providers. It is revealed in considering the result­ ing data, that higher education institutions provided the largest amount of professional development per teacher in terms of hours. The source of the next largest amount of professional development hours was local school districts, followed by intermediate districts and then by state professional development centers (of which there are only three). To summarize, an analysis of the data related to hours of attendance at professional development was conducted. It is shown by that analysis that the average number of professional development hours of which teachers were able to avail themselves ranged from 30.7 hours to 56.2 hours. It was further demonstrated that the largest number of professional development hours is provided by higher education insti­ tutions . Differences in the Availability of Services in Different Areas of the State One of the concerns of this study in regard to availability of services is the way in which professional development services are dis­ tributed throughout the state. Responses to the previous two questions already indicate that there is a difference in the services received by Detroit teachers in comparison to the rest of the state. The issue 83 of the distribution of those services is further pursued by analysis of data collected regarding the services teachers receive in different areas, of the state. For the purposes of this analysis, the counties in which teachers taught were combined to form three areas of the state: the Upper Peninsula, Northern Michigan, and Southern Michigan. Those three areas were compared to the existing Detroit sample, thus the area analysis was done using four areas of the state: Detroit, the Upper Peninsula, Northern Michigan, and Southern Michigan (minus Detroit). The analysis of the data by area are presented in Tables 11, 12, and 13. Comparisons of teacher participation in professional development activities are made in Table 11. It is seen in those comparisons that the rate of participation in professional development is lowest in the Upper Peninsula (61.1 percent). In fact, its rate of participation is almost 30 percent lower than that for Detroit teachers. All other areas of the state have at least a rate of participation at 75 percent. In a further comparison, using number of activities per participant, it is seen that those teachers receiving professional development services attend, on average, 3.0 activities per year in the Upper Peninsula to 6.6 activities per year in Detroit. Interestingly enough, the tendency for the Upper Peninsula teachers to have the lowest number does not hold up in comparing hours by area. Upper Peninsula profes­ sional development participants' mean number of hours (50.7) exceed all other areas except Detroits’ 56.2. Further analyses were conducted to determine if the differences perceived in the data between areas of the state could be said to be 84 Table 11.— Teacher Participation by Area. U .P. n ' = 36 Participation in Activities n % Total Response = 1,143 N. Mich. S. Mich, n = 716 n % n % n % Detroit n = 311 Yes n = 908 22 61.1 60 75.0 545 76.1 281 90.4 No n = 235 14 38.9 20 25.0 171 23.9 30 9.6 36 100.0 80 100.0 716 100.0 311 100.0 Totals Table 12.— Number of Activities per Participant by Area. U.P. n mean 22 3.0 N. Mich. S. Mich. n mean n mean n mean 3.5 536 4.2 275 6.6 59 Detroit Table 13.— Number of Hours per Participant by Area. U.P. N. Mich. S. Mich. Detroit n mean n mean n mean n mean 21 50.7 60 27.5 524 42.6 269 56.2 85 statistically significant. Two different hypotheses were tested using one way analysis of variance. The first hypothesis was: The number of activities teachers participate in annually is equally distributed among four different areas of the state. The second hypothesis was: The number of hours teachers participate in professional development annually is equally distributed among four different areas of the state. analyses of variance used a fixed effects model. basic assumptions were made. Both And for both, four The first assumption made is that, in spite of the nonresponse, and in spite of the fact that the respondents in each area (with the exception of Detroit respondents) are part of a sample drawn from a larger sampling frame, each group of respondents in the four areas under consideration are representative of the entire population of teachers in that area. The next three assumptions are basic to the use of analysis of variance.* The three assumptions are: (1) each of the teaching populations in each area is normally distributed in respect to the dependent variable, (2) the variances of the popula­ tions in each area are equal in respect to the dependent variable, and (3) the samples are independent of one another. The results of the analysis of variance for hypothesis one is presented in Table 14. Data resulting from the analysis of variance for hypothesis two are presented in Table 15. it is seen, in regard to hypothesis one, that For a complete discussion of the assumptions for ANOVA, see Gene V. Glass and Julian C. Stanley, Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970), pp. 339-340. For a discussion of ANOVA and its attumptions as related to nonexperimental research, see Frederick D. Herzon and Michael D. Hooper, Introduction to Statistics for the Social Sciences (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1976), pp. 380-381. 86 Table 14.--Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differences in Teacher Participation in Professional Development Activities by Area. Source** Sums of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Statistic Between 1272.1 3 424.03 19.953* Within 18871.0 888 Total 20143.0 891 21.251 *p = .0000 (rounded off by computer) **Source of Variation. That variation being, for ANOVA, always within each group and between the groups. For this analysis those groups are teachers in districts of different geographical areas and in districts of different sizes. Table 15.— Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differences in Hours of Teacher Participation in Professional Development by Area. Source** Between Sums of Squares 54947.0 Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Statistic 3 18316.0 3.3387* 5485.8 Within .4772677 870 Total .4827677 873 *p = .0189 **Source of Variation. That variation being, for ANOVA, always within each group and between the groups. For this analysis those groups are teachers in districts of different geographical areas and in districts of different sizes. 87 the probability of an F ratio as large or larger than 19.953 occurring if the null were true is zero. And in the case of the second hypothesis, the likelihood of obtaining an F of 3.3387 when the null is true is .0189. Clearly, professional development services, as reflected by the number of activities and hours teachers participate in professional development, varies by area of the state. Differences in the Availability of Services in School Districts of Different Sizes Another indicator of the availability of services throughout the state is the way in which those services are distributed between school districts of different sizes. Information was sought to deter­ mine whether or not there was a difference in the services available to teachers of school districts of differing sizes. Data are presented in Tables 16, 17, and 18 that represent the distribution of professional development activities by school district size. In Table 16, data related to participation by area are presented. The mean number of activities per participant by school district size is presented in Table 17. And the mean number of hours per participant is presented in Table 18. It is seen that, in terms of the rate of teacher participation in professional development, there is not a great deal of variation between districts of different sizes, except in the case of the over 50,000 district. This trend is maintained in respect to number of activities and hours of participation. The variation between categories of district sizes is not great, but the district with the greatest Table 16.— Teacher Participation by School District Size. Participation in Activities 50,000 and Over n = 260 10 ,000 to 49 ,999 n = 216 Total Response = 1,031 3,500 to 9,999 n = 221 1,500 to 3,499 n = 240 n % n % n % n % Less Than 1,500 n = 94 n % Yes n = 816 234 90.0 167 77.3 170 76.9 177 73.8 68 72.3 No N = 215 26 10.0 49 22.7 51 23.1 63 26.3 26 27.7 Totals 260 100.0 216 100.0 221 100.0 240 100 .1* 94 100.0 *Note: Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. Table 17.— Number of Activities per Participant by School District Size. 50,000 and Over n to 49,999 mean 233 6.7 n mean 181 1,500 to 3,499 3,500 to 9,999 10,000 3.8 n mean 168 4.7 n mean 177 3.8 Less Than 1,500 n mean 72 3.6 Table 18.— Number of Hours per Participant by School District Size. 50,000 and Over 3,500 to 9,999 10,000 to 49,999 1,500 to 3,499 Less Than 1,500 n mean n mean n mean n mean n mean 228 54.9 175 41.2 167 37.2 177 47.2 70 35.4 90 variation from the others is the one in the 50,000 and over group (Detroit). Variation between school district size was also submitted to further analysis by the use of one-way, fixed effects analysis of variance. Two hypotheses were tested: (1) The number of activities teachers participate in professional development are equally distributed among five different categories of school district sizes, and (2) The number of hours teachers participate in professional development is equally distributed among five different categories of school sizes. For both analyses, the same assumptions are made as were made for the previous two analyses of variance. Those assumptions are, the repre­ sentativeness of the samples, the normalcy of the populations, the equal variances within each population, and the independence of the samples. It is indicated by the analysis of variance for hypothesis one that the probability of obtaining the F statistic as large as did occur if the null were true is zero. Thus the number of activities in which teachers participate around the state varies by school district size. However, it is not as clear, based on the second analysis of variance, that the hours in which teachers participate necessarily varies with school district size. The Nature of the Current Professional Development Delivery System The nature of the existing professional development system was explored with the second basic research question: What is the nature of the current delivery system of those professional development activities attended by teachers? Five specific questions were Table 19.--Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differences in Teacher Participation in Professional Development Activities by School District Size. Source** Sums of Squares Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Statistic Between 1313.9 4 328.47 14.975* Within 18118.0 826 Total 19432.0 830 21.935 *P = .0000 (rounded off by computer) **Source of Variation. That variation being, for ANOVA, always within each group and between the groups. For this analysis, those groups are teachers in districts of different geographical areas and in districts of different sizes. Table 20.--■Results of One-Way Analysis of Variance of Differences in Hours of Teacher Participation in Professional Development by School District Size. Source** Between Sums of Squares 42288.0 Degrees of Freedom Mean Square F Statistic 4 10572.0 1.9949* 5299.7 Within .43033 7 812 Total .43456 7 816 *p = .0934 and thus, although there is a tendency in the response patterns to be different, the statistical significance is weak. **Source of Variation. That variation being, for ANOVA, always within each group and between the groups. For this analysis, those groups are teachers in districts of different geographical areas and in districts of different sizes. 92 investigated to explore various important characteristics of profes­ sional development in the state. The data and analysis related to each question are set forth below. Service Providers Service providers are one of the major components of the state's professional development system. The first question related to the nature of the system was developed to determine what organizations pro­ vide professional development services, and the extent of each organi­ zation's involvement in providing those services. Four providers, local school districts, intermediate school districts, state colleges and universities, and state professional development centers were explored as to the degree to which they were involved in providing services to teachers. Tables 20 through 22 are used to present the data related to those service providers. The rate at which teachers participate in professional development services for each provider is displayed in Table 20. In Table 21 the average number of activities per participant by provider is shown, and in Table 22 the average hours of participation per participant by provider is presented. For the purposes of organiz­ ing the tables, local school districts are indicated on the tables as LEA, intermediate districts are referred to as 1SD, state colleges and universities as SCU, and the state professional development centers as PDC. Over 50 percent of the teachers in each area (close to 75 per­ cent in Detroit) indicated they participate in professional development services provided by local school districts. Close to 30 percent of the teachers in all areas also indicated that they participated in 93 Table 21.--Participation in Professional Development by Service Provider. LEA ISD SCU PDC Area % n n % n % n % Detroit n = 311 232 74.6 85 27.4 90 28.9 75 24.1 Outstate n = 849 444 52,3 260 30.6 269 31.7 14 1.6 Statewide n = 944 513 54.3 281 29.8 296 31.4 40 4.2 Table 22.--Number of Activities per Participant by Provider. LEA ISD SCU PDC Area n mean n Detroit 223 4.7 81 Outstate 436 2.9 Statewide 503 3.1 mean n mean 3.2 87 3.4 74 2.8 254 2.2 265 2.7 13 1.8 275 2.3 291 2.8 39 2.4 n mean Table 23.--Number of Hours per Participant by Provider. LEA SCU ISD PDC Area n mean n mean n mean n mean Detroit 210 31.5 79 17.6 75 21.3 71 19.8 Outstate 427 14.0 255 11.9 245 68.8 13 11.9 Statewide 492 16.6 275 12.1 269 72.4 38 23.3 94 professional development services provided by intermediates; and also, approximately 30 percent of those teachers in the three areas analyzed used the services provided by state colleges and universities. The impact the state center has had on Detroit's professional development is seen by the difference in participation rate between the Detroit center and the two outstate ones. Detroit's center has been in opera­ tion longer than have the two outstate centers. And Detroit's teachers participated in the center's activities at a rate of 24.1 percent com­ pared with the outstate rate of 1.4 percent. When considering the actual number of activities in which teachers did participate it is seen that Detroit schools provided, on average, the largest number of activities per participant than did any other provider in the state. Detroit teachers also received larger numbers of activities from the other three service providers than the outstate teachers received from any source (with the exception of the relatively new center). With the center excluded the average number of services provided by each type of institution to Detroit participants ranged from 4.7 to 3.2; whereas, the outstate average number of activ­ ities per participant ranged from 2.2 to 2.9. Outstate, however, as in Detroit, the provider of the largest number of professional development activities per participant was the local district. The involvement of the various institutions in providing pro­ fessional development, however, looks different when considering average hours provided to the participants. Outstate, state colleges and universities provide the largest average number of hours per 95 participant. In the case of Detroit, the largest provider is still the local school district. Attributes of Professional Development In determining the nature of the professional development services currently available in the state, teachers' perceptions of the services were used to get an idea of what some of the attributes of those services are. Teachers' perceptions were assessed in terms of some characterizations of professional development drawn from pre­ liminary research, the usefulness of the service to the teacher, the cost to the teacher, and college credit hours earned by the teacher. Tables 23 through 34 present the data related to the attributes of the professional development services as perceived by teachers. Teachers' characterizations of the services they received from each category of providers are reported in Tables 23, 24, and 25. Teachers were asked to indicate to what degree they agreed or disagreed with each charac­ terization. The number 1 was used to indicate the teacher strongly agreed with the statement provided as it applied to the professional development services offered by each category of service providers, number 2 indicated agree, 3 represented disagree, and 4 was strongly disagree. Each statement presented for the teachers' review was a positive statement about professional development. Thus, the lower the score, the more positive the teachers' perceptions of the service pro­ vider. In analyzing the teachers' responses, the assumption is made that there is an equal distance between each level on the scale and the intervals between each level is the same for each respondent. The use­ fulness, or applicability, of the professional development services as 96 Table 24.— Characteristics of Services as Reported by Detroit Teachers. Characteristic LEA mean ISD mean SCU mean PDC meai Well organized 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 Conveniently located 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.6 Convenient time 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 Helped plan 2.8 2.9 2.8 2.4 Relevant/teaching 1.8 2.0 1.7 1.6 Relevant/district 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.5 Current 2.0 2.0 1.5 1.6 Useful 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.6 Share ideas 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.8 Good resource people 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.4 Individualized 2.5 2.5 1.8 2.0 Follow-through 2.7 2.9 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.7 Overall Mean 97 Table 25.— Characteristics of Services as Reported by Outstate Teachers. Characteristic LEA mean ISD mean SCU mean PDC meai Well organized 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.5 Conveniently located 1.4 1.6 2.0 1.7 Convenient time 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.7 Helped plan 2.6 2.9 2.8 2.7 Relevant/teaching 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.7 Relevant/district 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.6 Current 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.8 Useful 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.7 Share ideas 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.6 Good resource people 1.9 1.8 1.5 1.4 Individualized 2.6 2.6 2.0 2.3 Follow-through 2.8 3.0 2.6 2.5 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.8 Overall Mean 98 Table 26.— Characteristics of Services as Reported by Statewide Teachers. Characteristic LEA mean ISD mean SCU mean PDC meai Well organized 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 Conveniently located 1.4 1.6 2.0 1.7 Convenient time 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.7 Helped plan 2.6 2.9 2.8 2.6 Relevant/teaching 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.7 Relevant/district 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.6 Current 2.0 1.9 1.7 1.8 Useful 2.0 2.0 1.7 1.7 Share ideas 2.0 2.1 1.7 1.8 Good resource people 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.4 Individualized 2.6 2.6 2.0 2.1 Follow-through 3.0 3.0 2.5 2.5 2.1 1.9 1.9 1.8 Overall Mean 99 Table 27.— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences to Teaching as Reported by Detroit Teachers, LEA n = 231 Applicability n % ISD n = 84 n % SCU n = 87 % n PDC n = 72 n % Great deal 54 23.4 23 27.4 44 50.6 34 47.2 Some 93 40.3 29 34.5 27 31.0 27 37.5 Little 61 26.4 20 23.8 10 11.5 6 8.3 None 22 9.5 11 13.1 5 5.7 5 6.9 No opinion 1 0.4 1 1.2 1 1.1 0 0.0 Totals 231 100.0 84 100.0 87 99.9* 72 99.9* *Note: Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. Table 28.--Applicability of Professional Development Experiences to Teaching as Reported by Outstate Teachers. Applicability LEA n = 443 n % 67 15.1 Some 170 Little ISD n = 260 n SCU n = 268 PDC n = 13 % n % 54 20.8 99 36.9 2 15.4 38.4 117 45.0 116 43.3 8 61.5 140 31.6 58 22.3 38 14.2 2 15.4 61 13.8 31 11.9 11 4.1 1 7.7 No opinion 5 1.1 0 0.0 4 1.5 0 0.0 Totals 443 100.0 260 100.0 268 100.0 13 100.0 Great deal None n % *Note: Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. 100 Table 29.--Applicability o£ Professional Development Experiences to Teaching as Reported by Statewide Teachers. Applicability LEA n = 511 n % 86 16.8 Some 199 Little ISD n = 282 % n % 63 22.3 116 39.5 14 35.9 38.9 122 43.3 121 41.2 20 51.3 151 29.5 61 21.6 40 13.6 2 5.1 70 13.7 35 12.4 13 4.4 3 7.7 No opinion 5 1.0 1 0.4 4 1.4 0 0.0 Totals 511 282 100.0 294 39 100.0 Great deal None 99.9* n PDC n = 39 SCU n = 294 n 100.1* % *Note: Percentages have been rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. perceived by teachers is presented in Tables 26, 27, and 28. Whether or not teachers received college credit is reported in Tables 29, 30, and 31. The cost to the teachers for professional development services is shown in Tables 32, 33, and 34. It can be seen that the teachers' overall perception of the services they receive is positive. None of the overall mean character- istizations of the services were negative and the majority of the teachers found the services at least somewhat applicable to their teach­ ing. On average, however, teachers were more positive about those services provided by professional development centers and least positive about those services provided by local school districts. In respect to some key characteristics, differences in perceptions can also be seen. Teachers, for example, found services provided by professional 101 Table 30.--College Credit Earned by Detroit Participants. Earned Yes No Totals LEA n = 183 n % 12 6.6 171 183 SCU n = 71 ISD n = 60 PDC n = 50 n % % n % 3 5.0 47 66.2 5 10.0 93.4 S7 95.0 24 33.8 45 90.0 100.0 60 100.0 71 100.0 SO 100.0 n Table 31.--College Credit Earned by Outstate Participants. Earned Yes No Totals LEA n = 372 ISD n = 218 n % n % 23 6.2 15 349 93.8 372 100.0 SCU n = 246 PDC n = 11 n n % % 6.9 166 67.5 1 9.1 203 93.1 80 32.5 10 90.9 218 100.0 246 100.0 11 100.0 Table 32.--College Credit Earned by Statewide Participants. Earned Yes No Totals LEA n - 424 ISD n = 233 n % n % 27 6.4 15 397 93.6 424 100.0 SCU n - 267 PDC n = 30 n % n % 6.4 182 68.2 4 13.3 218 93.6 85 31.8 26 86.7 233 100.0 267 100.0 30 100.0 102 Table 33.— Professional Development Costs Reported by Detroit Teachers. LEA n = 226 Cost n % 201 88.9 Less than 50% of cost 9 More than 50% of cost SCU n = 85 ISD n = 81 % n % n % 67 82.7 31 36.5 69 95.8 4.0 5 6.2 3 3.5 0 0.0 4 1.8 3 3.7 47 55.3 2 2.8 Don't know 12 5.3 6 7.4 4 4.7 1 1.4 Totals 226 100.0 81 100.0 85 100.0 72 100.0 Free n PDC n = 72 Table 34.— ]Professional Development Costs Reported by Outstate Teachers. LEA n = 440 Cost ISD n = 257 SCU n = 268 PDC n = 14 n % n % 414 94.1 204 79.4 59 22.0 11 78.6 Less than 50% of cost 13 3.0 21 8.2 30 11.2 1 7.1 More than 50% of cost 6 1.4 24 9.3 175 65.3 2 14.3 Don't know 7 1.6 8 3.1 4 1.5 0 0.0 Totals 440 257 100.0 268 100.0 14 100.0 Free 100.1* n % n % *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily round to 100. 103 Table 35.— Professional Development Costs Reported by Statewide Teachers. LEA n = 508 Costs ISD n = 279 SCU n = 294 PDC n = 40 n % n % n % 476 93.7 221 79.2 165 22.1 36 90.0 Less than 50% of cost 16 3.1 23 8.2 32 10.9 1 2.5 More than 50% of cost 7 1.4 25 9.0 192 65.3 3 7.5 Don't know 9 1.8 10 3.6 5 1.7 0 0.0 Totals 508 100.0 279 100.0 294 100.0 40 100.0 Free % n development centers and higher education institutions better organized than those provided by local or intermediate districts. Likewise, offerings from the centers and higher education were seen as more current than were the programs provided by local or intermediate dis­ tricts. When considering applicability of the services provided, it can be seen that a majority of the teachers found the programs offered by each category of service provider at least somewhat applicable. Although, again, the centers and state colleges and universities were seen as being somewhat more applicable. In terms of cost to the teachers, it is shown by the data that most of the activities provided by the local school districts, inter­ mediate districts and state centers were free. Also, close to one- third of the teachers paid for less than 50 percent of the cost of services they received from higher education institutions. 104 Differences in Teachers1 Perceptions of Professional Development Services by Area of the State Related to the question of the attributes of the current avail­ able services, is the question of whether or not those services are perceived differently by teachers in different areas of the state. Data were collected to assess what differences may exist in those per­ ceptions. Tables 35 through 38 are used to present data on the per­ ceptions of teachers in four different areas of the state, the Upper Peninsula, Northern Michigan, Southern Michigan, and Detroit, in respect to the applicability of services they received from each cate­ gory of service providers. In respect to the applicability of professional development experiences, Upper Peninsula teachers tended to be the most enthusiastic about the professional development services they have received. Also, a sizeable group of Detroit teachers indicated they were able to apply some of their professional development experiences a great deal. How­ ever, they did not find the services available from all categories of providers as applicable to their teaching as did the Upper Peninsula teachers. The higher education institutions and the professional development center rendered the services to Detroit teachers that most found they were able to apply a great deal. Also, more teachers in Northern and Southern Michigan found that they could apply a great deal of what they learned at higher education activities more frequently than they could apply a great deal of what they learned at professional development activities conducted by the other categories of providers. 105 Table 36.— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Pro­ vided by Local Schools by Area. UP n * 11 Applicability % n NM n » 42 n Detroit n = 231 SM n = 379 % n % n % Great deal 6 54.5 6 14.3 54 14.2 54 23.4 Some 3 27.3 16 38.1 147 38.8 93 40.3 Little 2 18.2 12 28.6 121 31.9 61 26.4 None 0 0.0 7 16.7 53 14.0 22 9.5 No opinion 0 0.0 1 2.4 4 1.1 1 0.4 Totals 11 100.0 42 379 100.0 231 100.0 100.1* *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. Table 37.— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Pro­ vided by Intermediate Districts by Area. Applicability UP n = 10 n % NM n = 27 n SM n = 220 % n % Detroit n = 84 % n Great deal 4 40.0 3 11.1 46 20.9 23 27.4 Some 1 10.0 15 55.5 99 45.0 29 34.5 Little 4 40.0 4 14.8 50 22.7 20 23.8 None 1 10.0 5 18.5 25 11.4 11 13.1 No opinion 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.2 Totals 10 100.0 27 99.9* 220 100.0 84 100.0 *Note: Percentages are rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. 106 Table 38.--Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Pro­ vided by Higher Education by Area. UP n = 15 Applicability % n NM n = 23 n SM n = 223 Detroit n = 87 % n % n % Great deal 6 40.0 8 34.8 82 36.8 44 50.6 Some 5 33.3 9 39.1 100 44.8 27 31.0 Little 3 20.0 6 26.1 27 12.1 10 11.5 None 0 0.0 0 0.0 11 4.9 5 5.7 No opinion 1 6.7 0 0.0 3 1.3 1 1.1 Totals 15 100.0 0 100.0 223 99.9* 87 99.9* *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. I TJ Table 39.— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Pro­ vided by Centers by Area. Applicability n NM n = 0 0 % % n SM n = 13 n % Detroit n = 72 n % Great deal 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 15.4 34 47.2 Some 0 0.0 0 0.0 8 61.5 27 37.5 Little 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 15.4 6 8.3 None 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 7.7 5 6.9 No opinion 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 0 0.0 0 0.0 13 100.0 72 *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. 99.0* 107 Differences in Teachers* Perceptions of Professional Development Services by School District Size Another issue of importance with respect to the characteristics of teacher professional development is the distribution of those charac­ teristics by school district size. This study investigated that issue by analyzing the differences in teachers' perceptions of the services in school districts of differing sizes. detailing what differences do exist. Set forth below are the data In Tables 39 through 42 compari­ sons are made of teachers' perceptions of the applicability of the services they received from each category of service provider by school district size. A consideration of those tables reveals that most teachers in each size category were able to apply at least some of what they learned from their professional development experiences. Contract Provisions Another question of importance in determining the nature of the existing system of professional development is the amount and way in which professional development is formally provided for through teacher contracts. Questions designed to collect data on contract provisions were asked of the two samples. The summary of that data is presented in Tables 43 through 45. Over 60 percent of the teachers indicated that their teaching contracts require the local district to provide inservice programs. Also, over 40 percent of the teachers' contracts require that teachers participate in planning their inservice activities. However, not a particularly large group of teachers (20 percent) were from districts in which the district was required to pay for coursework if it was Table 40-— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Local Schools by District Size. Applicability 50,000 and Over n = 195 10,000 to 49,999 n = 140 3 ,500 to 9,999 n = 119 1,500 to 3,499 n = 116 n n n n % % % % Less Than 1, 500 n = 46 n % Great deal 44 22.6 20 14.3 18 15.1 15 12.9 10 21.7 Some 77 39.5 51 36.4 52 43.7 46 39.7 14 30.4 Little 52 26.7 48 34.3 35 29.4 38 32.8 12 26.1 None 21 10.8 20 14.3 13 10.9 15 12.9 9 19.6 No opinion 1 0.5 1 0.7 1 0.8 2 1.7 1 2.2 Totals 195 140 100.0 119 116 100.0 46 100.0 100.1* 99.9* *Note: Percentages have been rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. Table 41.— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Intermediate Schools by District Size. Applicability SO, 000 and Over n =: 73 101,000 to 49,999 n = 68 n n % % 3,500 to 9,999 n = 63 1,500 to 3,499 n = 78 n n % % Less Than 1,500 n = 35 % n Great deal 19 26.0 10 14.7 17 27.0 14 17.9 10 28.6 Some 27 37.0 27 39.7 25 39.7 38 48.7 14 40.0 Little 17 23.3 20 29.4 15 23.8 19 24.4 4 11.4 None 10 13.7 10 14.7 6 9.5 7 9.0 7 20.0 No opinion 0 0.0 1 1.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 73 100.0 68 100.0 63 100.0 78 100.0 35 100.0 Table 42.— Applicability of Professional Development Experiences Provided by Higher Education by District Size. Applicability 50, 000 and Over n =‘ 73 % n 10,000 to 49,999 n = 60 3, 500 to 9 ,999 n = 74 1,500 to 3,499 n = 85 n n n % % % Less Than 1. 500 n = 32 n % Great deal 34 46.6 24 40.0 24 32.4 30 35.3 13 40.6 Some 24 32.9 19 31.7 36 48.6 44 51.8 11 34.4 Little 10 13.7 11 18.3 11 14.9 8 9.4 6 18.8 None 4 5.5 5 8.3 2 2.7 3 3.5 0 0.0 No opinion 1 1.4 1 1.7 1 1.4 0 0.0 2 6.3 Totals 73 60 100.0 74 100.0 85 100.0 32 100.1* *Note: Percentages have been rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. 100.1* Table 43 .— Applicability of Professional Development Experience Provided by Centers by District Size. Applicability 50,000 and Over n == 63 1C1,000 to 49,999 n = 5 3,500 to 9,999 n = 8 1,500 to 34,99 n = 4 n n n n % % % % Less Than 1, 500 n = 3 n % Great deal 30 47.6 1 20.0 1 12.5 1 25.0 3 100.0 Some 24 38.1 2 40.0 5 62.5 2 50.0 0 0.0 Little 5 7.9 1 20.0 1 12.5 1 25.0 0 0.0 None 4 6.3 1 20.0 1 12.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 No opinion 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Totals 63 99.9* 5 100.0 8 100.0 4 100.0 3 100.0 *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. 112 Table 44.— Contract Provision Reported by Detroit Respondents. Required for Pay Increase n = 252 Required Local,iy = 252 Teachers Plan n = 252 District ^ a y n = 252 n % n % n Yes 161 63.9 130 51.6 35 13.9 75 29.8 No 91 36.1 122 48.4 217 86.1 177 70.2 252 100.0 252 100.0 252 100.0 252 100.0 Provided Totals % n % Table 45 .— Contract Provisions Reported by Outstate Respondents. rroviaea Required Locally Teachers Plan n = 683 n = 683 District Required to Pay n = 683 Required for Pay Increase n = 683 n % n % n % n % Yes 414 60.6 286 41.9 143 20.9 277 40.6 No 269 39.4 397 58.1 540 79.1 406 59.4 683 100.0 683 100.0 683 100.0 683 100.0 Totals 113 Table 4 6 .--Contract Provisions Reported by Statewide Respondents. Provided Required Locally Teachers Plan n = 759 n = 759 Districts Required To Pay n = 759 Required for Pay Increase n = 759 n % n % n % n % Yes 469 61.8 317 41.8 152 20.0 298 39.3 No 290 38.2 442 58.2 607 80.0 461 60.7 759 100.0 759 100.0 759 100.0 759 100.0 Totals related to their teaching assignments, but over one-third of the teachers were from districts that required teachers to have further professional development in order to receive pay increases. Interest­ ingly enough, in the one district that was sampled separately, Detroit, the teachers did not agree on what the contract provided. For example, close to half the Detroit teachers indicated that their contract requires that teachers participate in planning inservice and a little over half indicated that their contract did not require that teachers participate. That suggests that teachers may not be totally knowledge­ able about the contents of their contracts. Perceived Needs of Teachers and Their Receptivity to More Professional Development The last basic research question looked at the professional development recipients, teachers. Teachers, and their attitudes toward professional development, are considered an important component of the state's system in this study. Whether or not teachers felt profes­ sional development services had some value for them personally, and 114 what characteristics of professional development are important to teachers' willingness to participate, are important factors in the success or failure of a professional development program. Four specific questions were asked to assess the teachers' attitudes toward profes­ sional development. Data collected for those questions are summarized below. Important Attributes of Professional Development Teachers were asked to rank the importance of fourteen attri­ butes of professional development. Table 46 is used to present the data summaries of their responses. It can be seen that teachers most frequently indicated that an essential characteristic was "knowledge­ able and experienced resource people." Also frequently cited as essen­ tial were the attributes "well organized" and "practical and useful." Over 50 percent of the teachers saw "current" and "convenient time" as being of great importance to them. At the other end of the scale, the attribute most frequently deemed not relevant was earning college credit. Another not relevant characteristic for close to 16 percent of the teachers was having the opportunity to plan the activities. Another characteristic investigated with respect to teachers' preference was the source of the service. Teachers were asked to rank their preferred sources of professional development. to present a summary of the teachers' rankings. Table 47 is used Teachers ranked their preferred service providers on a scale of zero to five, which, in coding for the computer, became one to six. Teachers' preferences are Table 47.— Characteristics Reported as Being Important Statewide. _. . .. Characteristic c ... Essential n % Of Great , Importance r n % Of Some ^ Importance r n Well organized n = 940 6gg ?3 3 223 23 ? 2g Conveniently located n = 940 266 2g 3 4g3 2 21? % Not ^ Relevant n 3>0 % „ . . Totals n q o.O 940 100.0 23 4 0>4 940 i o o .O Convenient time n = 938 334 35.6 477 50.9 124 13.2 3 0.3 938 100.0 No cost n = 935 142 15.2 235 25.1 492 52.6 66 7.1 935 100.0 90 9.6 27.5 440 47.0 149 15.9 937 100.0 Relevant/1 eaching n = 942 535 56.8 353 37.5 49 5.2 5 0.5 942 100.0 Relevant/district n = 942 268 28.5 439 46.6 217 23.0 18 1.9 942 100.0 Current n = 937 358 38.2 473 50.5 103 11.0 3 0.3 937 100.0 Useful n = 939 636 23 24. 1 0.1 939 Credit n = 939 50 415 44.2 320 34.1 939 HelJ 67.7 5.3 258 279 154 29.7 16.4 99.9* 100.0 Table 47.— Continued. Essential Characteristic n % Of Great Importance Of Some Importance n % n % Not Relevant n % Totals n % Share ideas n = 941 143 15.2 445 47.3 315 33.5 38 4.0 941 100.0 People n = 940 716 76.2 199 21.2 23 2.4 2 0.2 940 100.0 Individualized n = 942 89 9.4 314 33.3 447 47.5 92 9.8 942 100.0 Follow-Through n = 939 153 16.3 402 42.8 325 34.6 59 6.3 939 100.0 *Note: Percentages are rounded and will not necessarily add to 100. 117 Table 48.— Preferred Service Providers. Provider Detroit Outstate Statewide ISD 3.2295 3.9729 3.9718 SDE 3.1438 3.1198 3.0057 SCU 4.0741 4.0604 4.3722 LEA 4.4120 4.0515 4.1229 reflected as a mean of those rankings in Table 47. Thus, the higher the score, the more preferred is the associated option. Preferred service deliverers were higher education institutions and local dis­ tricts. The least preferred source of professional development was the Department of Education. Teachers1 Need or Willingness Whether or not teachers' perceived themselves as having a need for professional development has been considered in this study to be an important factor in their constructive participation in professional development. Also, teachers' attitudes in general toward professional development have been considered important to the success of any pro­ fessional development program. Thus two questions were asked to deter­ mine the teachers' attitudes toward professional development in general and their perceptions of their own needs for those activities. Tables 48 and 49 set forth a summary of the teachers' responses to those questions. Over 60 percent of the teachers strongly support the expansion of professional development services and close to 60 percent of the 118 Table 4 9 .— Need for Expansion of Professional Development Services. Detroit n = 298 Attitude Outstate n = 834 Statewide n * 928 n % n % n % 193 64.8 519 62.2 578 62.6 Weakly support 54 18.1 212 25.4 228 24.7 Weakly oppose 15 5.0 21 2.5 24 2.6 Strongly oppose 14 4.7 16 1.9 22 2.4 No opinion 22 7.4 66 7.9 71 7.7 Totals 298 100.0 834 928 100.0 Strongly support 99.9* *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. Table 50.--Perceived Benefit. Detroit n = 301 Benefit Outstate n = 829 Statewide n = 919 n % n % n % 181 60.1 481 58.0 539 58.7 Small extent 77 25.6 229 27.6 250 27.2 No benefit 22 7.3 48 5.8 56 6.1 No opinion 21 7.0 71 8.6 74 8.1 Totals 301 100.0 829 100.0 919 Great deal 100.!♦ ♦Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. 119 teachers feel they could benefit a great deal from an expansion of professional development services. Very few of the teachers either opposed the concept of an expanded professional development system or felt that an expanded system would be of no benefit to them. Thus, teachers’ receptivity to professional development is positive. Differences in Perceived Need by Area This study also explored the differences between teachers' perceived needs by area of the state. Table 50 is used to show the information gathered pertaining to that question. Broken down by area, teachers' responses do not differ greatly from area to area with respect to their perceived need for professional development. Table 51 .— Perceived Need by Area. UP n = 35 Benefit NM n = 79 SM n = 702 Detroit n = 301 n % n % n % n % 20 57.1 43 54.4 410 58.4 181 60.1 Small extent 8 22.9 26 32.9 192 27.4 77 25.6 No benefit 3 8.6 4 5.1 40 5.7 22 7.3 No opinion 4 11.4 6 7.6 60 8.5 21 7.0 Totals 35 100.0 79 100.0 702 100.0 301 100.0 Great deal Differences in Perceived Need by District Size Differences in teachers' perceived needs in districts of dif­ fering sizes were also explored. Summary data related to that issue 120 is presented in Table 51. It can be seen that teachers' attitudes in districts of differing sizes are all strongly positive toward profes­ sional development as reflected in their perceptions of the benefits they would derive from an expansion of the professional development system. Summary In this chapter, the results of the research have been reported. The major findings were reported in the order in which the three basic research questions were asked. The first basic research question reported on in this study provided information on the availability of teacher professional devel­ opment to state teachers. It was seen that, on average, over 30 hours per year of professional development are available to teachers and that those services are widely available throughout the state. How­ ever, it was also found that the amount of services available vary by area of the state. The second stage of the investigation gathered information on the nature of the existing system. The local school districts were seen to provide professional development services for the largest percentage of teachers. The impact of the Detroit center is seen in considering Detroit teachers' experiences. Close to a quarter of those teachers have participated in the activities provided by the center which had been in existence for three years at the time of the study. Overall, teachers' attitudes toward professional development were positive. Although, centers and state colleges and universities were viewed more positively than were the intermediate districts and local Table 52.— Perceived Need by District Size. o o o SO, and Over n == 259 Benefit 10i,000 to 49,999 n = 225 3,500 to 9,999 n = 223 1,,500 to 3,499 n == 236 Less Than 1, 500 n = 94 n n % n % n % n % 153 59.1 124 55.1 131 58.7 143 60.6 51 54.3 Small extent 67 25.9 71 31.6 58 26.0 64 27.1 28 29.8 No benefit 22 8.5 11 4.9 14 6.3 11 4.7 4 4.3 No opinion 17 6.6 19 8.4 20 9.0 18 7.6 11 11.7 Totals 259 225 100.0 223 100.0 236 100.0 94 100.1* Great deal 100.1* *Note: Percentages are rounded and do not necessarily add to 100. % 122 districts. Area comparisons revealed that teachers in the Upper Peninsula were more enthusiastic about their professional development activities than were teachers in other areas of the state. The third part of this study explored teachers1 receptivity to professional development and perceived needs in that area. It was found that, in regard to attributes of importance to teachers, high quality resource people, being well organized, and practicality were most highly ranked. Of least importance to teachers were earning college credit and participating in planning. Teachers were found to be very positive in their attitude toward additional professional devel­ opment in general and for themselves in particular. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this chapter is to provide a general summary of the study, a report of findings and conclusions relative to the three basic research questions, and a presentation of implications for decision-makers who must make decisions relative to professional devel­ opment and for further investigation. Summary This study has been an investigation of the state's existing teacher professional development system from the perspective of decisionoriented evaluation research theory. The purpose has been to collect, on a statewide, systematic basis, information that contributes to edu­ cational policy makers' understanding of the current state professional development system. An assumption has been that educational policy making will benefit from the systematic analysis of state level educa­ tional issues. This study has been an attempt to provide that system­ atic analysis by applying some of the basic techniques of social science research to an educational issue of importance to state decision makers. The research is limited by two factors: the research is evalu­ ation research and as such is conducted in a political milieu and the research relied on a bulk rate, mailed questionnaire. 123 124 This study drew from the concepts of both evaluation theory and professional development theory. In studying the state's teacher professional development system, it was viewed as a three part system. The parts are: the professional development service providers, the service recipients, and the students. This study focused on the service providers and service recipients, since it was felt that the nature of each element and the interaction of both were essential to any professional development system. The literature search for this study sought to bring into focus evaluation research as it relates to educational policy development and teacher professional development as a government policy issue, particularly in Michigan. It was seen that, although teacher profes­ sional development has been an historical policy issue, and is cur­ rently a much discussed policy issue, there are still many unresolved issues to be addressed by policy makers. Evaluation research was found to be one tool specifically designed to address the needs of policy makers confronted with such unresolved policy issues. Another assump­ tion of this study is that one of the most important factors affecting the future quality of education in this state will be decisions made by state level policy makers and evaluation research can contribute positively to those decisions. In order to accomplish the objective of this study, a special instrument was developed. This instrument collected three types of information: (a) biographical, (b) nature of existing system as experi­ enced and perceived by recipients of those services, and (3) teachers' attitudes and receptivity toward professional development. To gather 125 data for the first category of information, teachers were asked to respond to questions about their professional background. To collect data for the second category, nature of the existing system, teachers were asked to respond to questions regarding the extent of their involvement in professional development, the source of their profes­ sional development and their assessment of the quality and value of those activities. To obtain data for the third category of informa­ tion, teachers were asked to indicate attributes of professional devel­ opment of importance to them and to indicate how important they con­ sider professional development to be. and means. Data were reported by percentages Further analyses were conducted by comparing data by area and school district size and by conducting analysis of variance to further clarify existing differences in some cases. Major Findings The major purpose of this investigation has been stated as research questions in Chapter II. The following portion of this chapter will summarize the findings in terms of the three major research questions and their related questions. Research question I was: "What professional development activ­ ities are currently available in which state teachers participate?" Generally, it was found that the resources of four tax supported pro­ fessional development service providers were widely available to state teachers. However differences were found in the availability of services in different locations around the state. In order to respond to the first research question, four specific research questions were answered. The first question was: 126 "How many professional development activities have teachers attended in one year?" It was seen that the majority of teachers throughout the state participated in teacher professional development. However, whereas a large majority of the state's teachers participated in profes­ sional development, Detroit teachers' participation was almost universal. This variation held when the specific number of activities teachers participated in was considered. Statewide respondents had participated, on average, in over three activities in one year. Detroit teachers' average was close to six activities per respondent in one year. Thus, professional development is apparently more available to Detroit teachers than to teachers in other parts of the state. The second question asked for the first research question was: "What is the total number of contact hours teachers have had in profes­ sional development activities in one year?" Findings for this question were similar to those for the previous question. On average, respon­ dents in both samples had spent a large number of hours in pursuing their further professional development. And again, Detroit teachers led those in the rest of the state in the average number of hours they were involved in professional development. Higher education institu­ tions provided the largest number of hours of professional development services to the respondents, as might be expected since higher educa­ tion institutions generally conduct professional development in term long courses which require a large number of hours in attendance. Two of the questions related to availability were designed to provide information about the distribution of teacher professional development services around the state. One of those questions was: 127 "Is there a difference in the availability of professional development services between areas of the state?" When the responses were compared by geographic region, it was seen that Upper Peninsula teachers had the least services available to them as represented by their rate of participation and the number of activities they attended. However, this relative lack of services for those teachers was not reflected in the number of hours of participation. Since the Upper Peninsula teachers attended less activities, but did not spend fewer hours in attending those activities, it could be assumed that Upper Peninsula teachers more frequently receive their professional development by attending courses at higher education institutions than do the rest of the state's teachers. The other question assessing the nature of the distribution of services was: "Is there a difference in the availability of professional development services in school districts of different sizes?" Of particular concern in this question is whether or not teachers in smaller districts, with limited resources, are seriously hampered in obtaining professional development services. Detroit's greater avail­ ability of those services is the only major difference between size categories. Even teachers in the smallest districts had a substantial majority participating in teacher professional development. And the number of activities and hours of participation for those teachers from smaller districts was not considerably different than for teachers in other school districts. Research question II was: "What is the nature of the current delivery system of those professional development activities attended 128 by teachers?" It was seen that all four of the tax supported service providers, local school districts, higher education institutions, intermediate districts, and state centers, were actively a part of the state's professional development system and the services received from that system were generally positively described by teachers. There were, however, some variations in teachers' perceptions of the services provided. Further, teacher contracts have various clauses related to professional development and thus, affect the nature of the system. Five specific questions were used to gather information on various aspects of the state professional development system. The first question was: "What organizations provided those services?" The largest number of teachers participated in activities provided by their local school districts, but all of the service providers were actively involved in providing teachers with professional development oppor­ tunities. In Detroit, where the state's professional development center has been in existence for several years, almost a quarter of the teachers had participated in the activities available from that center. Although local school districts provided the largest number of activ­ ities for teachers, and more teachers participated in services offered locally, higher education institutions offered the largest number of hours of professional development, except in Detroit. The second question was: "What are some of the attributes of those professional development services as perceived by teachers?" Overall, teachers were positive in their reactions to the services they received. and current. Activities were described as well organized, useful However, teachers did not frequently have the opportunity 129 to plan their professional development activities. Interestingly enough, higher education institutions, which are frequently criticized for not providing individualized attention, statewide were most fre­ quently described as providing individualized services. Teachers were most enthusiastic about services provided by the centers and least enthusiastic about services provided by their local schools. Centers and higher education institutions were more frequently described as well organized and current than were local or intermediate district offerings. All of the groups of teachers found their professional development activities generally at least somewhat applicable to their teaching situation. With the exception of higher education services, most of the activities were provided to the teachers for free. The third question was: "Is there a difference in the way in which teachers perceive those professional development services in different areas of the state?" Some variations were found in teachers' perceptions of the applicability of professional development services. Upper Peninsula teachers were most able to apply their professional development to their teaching situations. Detroit teachers, however, found they were most able to apply those services offered by state colleges and universities. Northern Michigan and Southern Michigan teachers indicated higher education activities were most applicable. The fourth question was: "Is there a difference in the way in which teachers perceive those professional development services in school districts of different size?" The over 50,000 district's teachers (Detroit teachers) were most able to apply a great deal of their professional development experiences; but overall, there was not 130 great variation in teachers' ability to apply professional development by school district size. The last question was: "What contract provisions are there that affect professional development?" A majority of the teachers indicated that they taught in districts in which contracts required that local districts provide inservice for teachers. A little less than a majority worked in districts with contract provisions requiring that teachers participate in planning professional development activities. A rela­ tively small number of teachers had contracts that required districts to pay for coursework or required teachers to have further professional development to receive pay increases. Research question III was: "What are the perceived needs of teachers and their receptivity to more professional development?" Teachers were receptive to professional development and particularly valued high quality resource people, well organized activities, and practicality. Four specific questions were responded to for the third research question. The first question was: "What attributes of professional development activities are important to teachers?" Many teachers felt that having good resource people and practical, well organized activ­ ities were essential. Also, a large number of teachers considered current and conveniently timed services to be of great importance. Of least importance to teachers was earning college credit and participating in planning the activities. The teachers preferred to have their pro­ fessional development provided by local school districts or by higher education. 131 The second question was: "Is there a need or willingness on the part of teachers to participate in an expanded professional development system?" Clearly, teachers are receptive to professional development and feel they could personally benefit from additional involvement in it. Over half of the teachers strongly supported an expansion of the existing system and very few actually opposed the idea of expansion. Also, over half felt they could benefit a great deal from more profes­ sional development activities and very few felt they could not benefit at all. The third question was: "Is there a difference in the perceived need of teachers in different areas of the state?" Teachers did not differ substantially in their needs in different areas of the state. Even in Detroit, where teachers already are the most involved in pro­ fessional development, over 60 percent of the teachers felt they could benefit greatly from more professional development. The fourth question was: "Is there a difference in the per­ ceived need of teachers in school districts of different size?" There was not a substantial difference in teachers needs in school districts of varying size. In addition to the findings related to the research questions, there were two other findings of importance to persons involved in providing teacher professional development services. Those two are the results of the analysis of the teachers1 professional background and are related to the type of certification teachers possess and the area in which they teach. An issue of relevance to developing professional development policy is whether or not teachers have incentives to continue 132 their professional development. Previously, it was felt that the need to gain more credit hours to achieve a permanent certificate would encourage a significant number of teachers to participate in continuing education. However, it is seen from this study that the great majority of the teachers had already met all requirements for permanent certifi­ cation. Another issue of concern to policy makers has been whether or not the pressures of declining enrollment has caused a sizeable number of teachers to teach out of areas in which they are academically pre­ pared. This did not prove to be the case. teachers were teaching in their major area. The great majority of the Very few of the teachers were not teaching in either their major or minor area. Discussion and Implications This study was conducted to provide information that would be useful in making decisions in the political arena. It is intended to be part of a broader process in which social values are translated into law. Thus, although the following discusses the implications of the study from the perspective of the evaluator conducting the study; as evaluation research, this study cannot be considered "complete" until it is set into the context of the political arena and discussed in the context of the various, and sometimes conflicting values associ­ ated with professional development there. In regard to the state's policy related to teacher professional development there were a number of implications that should be considered in planning any alterations in the existing system. 133 1. The variations in teacher participation would suggest that decision makers may need to address the geographical imbalance in the distribution of professional development that currently exists. makers have essentially two options to consider. Policy The first option would be to assume that teachers have different levels of professional development needs in different areas of the state. In that case, it would not be necessary to attempt to equalize the distribution of services, but only attempt to assure that the various levels of needs are being met. The second option would be to assume that, although teachers may need different types of professional development, they all basically need the same amount and attempt to provide a more equal distribution of those services. The fact that all teachers in all areas of the state were enthusiastic about professional development and all felt they could benefit from more would seem to suggest the second option is better. 2. Although the teacher professional development center has been well received in Detroit, the fact that teachers already receive a substantial amount of professional development and they also perceive those services to be of high quality, suggest that an entirely new structure is not needed. 3. Although the traditional source of teacher continuing edu­ cation, higher education, has been strongly criticized in much of the literature and public comments related to teacher professional develop­ ment, this study did not find evidence to support that criticism. fact, the reverse is true. In The higher education institutions apparently have a lot to offer in the area of teacher professional development. 134 4. Attributes described by teachers as being of importance to them suggest that professional development service providers should provide services in something that might be called the "blitzkrieg" approach. Providers should offer conveniently timed, well organi­ zed units that are related to issues of current concern to teachers and are practical in the sense that teachers can immediately apply what they learn to the classroom. 5. Although much of the recent writings on professional devel­ opment stress the importance of teachers having the opportunity to plan their own professional development activities, this research did not find evidence to support the concept. Teachers would rather, for example, have their professional development well organized than have the opportunity to plan it. This is of importance to planners if con­ fronted with a choice of involving a large number of teachers in the planning or making sure that the activities are well organized. Well organized would be a better choice. 6. Another issue of importance in the professional development literature has been whether or not teachers are externally or intern­ ally motivated with respect to teacher professional development. Will teachers go of their own accord to professional development activities, or do they need to be prodded or enticed to participate? This study's findings indicate that teachers are enthusiastic about professional development, personally feel they could benefit from more, and apply what they do receive. They are, in other words, internally motivated. Thus, it appears that the state's system does not need to concern itself with motivating teachers as much as it needs to make sure that 135 the appropriate services are in the appropriate area of the state for teachers to use. 7. The fact that teachers preferred to receive their profes­ sional development services from their local districts or from higher education institutions suggest that a collaborative effort between these two groups should be encouraged. Both service providers have something to offer to such an effort and a combination would maximize the effectiveness of the resources available in the existing system. Local districts have the advantage of knowing teachers personally and of better knowing the specific needs of the district. State colleges and universities have the advantage of being somewhat removed and there­ fore more objective in their consideration of local school problems. They also have large amounts of resources, in terms of research capacity and expertise, to assist local schools in meeting their professional development needs. Implications for Further Research There were a number of questions which developed from this investigation which suggest the need for further research. Some of these are listed below. 1. One of the most serious problems decision makers must deal with in establishing methods of providing professional development is the lack of certainty that exists regarding what "good" professional development is. this study? Is it that which teachers indicate is good, as in Is it that which others perceive, besides teachers, like administrators, parents, students to be good? Is it that professional development which demonstrates a measureable difference on some 136 educational objective? This problem needs to be addressed in two ways. Values need to be clarified regarding professional development and its goals. Then research needs to be conducted to establish what type and/ or quantity of professional development provides the desired outcomes. Ideally, it would be possible to establish the amount and type of pro­ fessional development teachers in different locations and different backgrounds would need. For example, a teacher in the Upper Peninsula lith elementary students would need x quantity of type y professional development, whereas Detroit teachers, needing to be far more sophis­ ticated in their teaching skills, and therefore need 2x quantity of type y and z professional development. 2. Since this is the first stage of evaluation research, it is obvious that if this is to be an ongoing program, it should even­ tually be put through all the stages of evaluation research up to the point that it has been established whether or not professional develop­ ment makes a difference with respect to important social goals. The next stage in this process is to conduct a needs assessment. A needs assessment would compare desired amounts and types of professional development with existing types and amounts. But first, it would be necessary to establish what is desirable with respect to professional development as discussed above. There is yet no consensus in the field about what "ought to be." 3. Since this study had so many nonresponses, it would be useful to duplicate the study in a manner that would assure 100 percent response and compare the results of that study with this to see if there were any significant differences in the findings. 137 4. It would also be useful to compare those teachers that seldom participate in professional development with those that do to determine if they are different with respect to teaching ability, per­ ceptions of professional development, and needs. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Babbie, Earl L. Survey Research Methods. Belmont, California: Wads­ worth Publishing Company, Inc., 1973. Bailey, Stephen K. et al. Schoolmen and Politics: A Study of State Aid to Education in the Northeast. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 1962. Bernstein, Ilene Nagel and Howard E. Freeman. Academic and Entre­ preneurial Research: The Consequences oT~Diversity in Federal Evaluation Studies. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 197S. Borg, Walter and Meridith D. Gall. Educational Research: An Intro­ duction. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1963. Caro, Francis G. (ed.). Readings in Evaluation Research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1971. Coleman, James S. et al. Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of HEW, USOE, OE-38001, 1966. Dain, Floyd R. Education in the Wilderness. Lansing: Michigan His­ torical Commission, 1968. Devaney, Kathleen (ed.). Essays on Teachers1 Centers. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977. Disbrow, Donald W. Schools for an Urban Society. Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968. Edelfelt, Roy A. and E. Brooks Smith (eds.). Breakaway to Multi­ dimensional Approaches: Integrating Curriculum Development and Inservice Education. Washington, D.C.: Association of Teacher Educators, 1978. Glass, Gene V. and Julian C. Stanley. Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970. 138 139 Harper, Charles A. A Century of Public Teacher Education. Washington, D.C.: National Education Association, 1939. Hatry, Harry P. et al. Program Analysis for State and Local Government. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1976. Hatry, Harry P.; Richard E. Winnie; and Donald M. Fisk. Practical Program Evaluation for State and Local Government Officials. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1973. Herzon, Frederick D. and Michael D. Hooper. Introduction to Statistics for the Social Sciences. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1976. Iannaccone, Laurence. Politics in Education. New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1967. Jencks, Christopher et al. Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America. New York: Basic Books, 1972. Karabel, Jerome and A. H. Halsey. Power and Ideology in Education. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977. Koerner, James D. The Mis Education of American Teachers. Baltimore: Penquin Books, 1965. Levine, Donald M. and Mary Jo Bane. The "Inequality" Controversy: Schooling and Distributive Justice. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1975. McCarty, Donald T. New Perspectives on Teacher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973. Meyer, Adolphe E. An Educational History of the American People. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967. Rivlin, Alice M. Systematic Thinking for Social Action. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1971. Ryan, Kevin (ed.). Teacher Education: The Seventy-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Part II. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975. Rubin, Louis J. (ed.). Improving In-Service Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1971. Smith, E. Brooks et al. Partnership in Teacher Education. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, 1967. .140 Starring, Charles R. and James 0. Knauss. The Michigan Search for Educational Standards. Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1968. Struening, Elmer R. and Marcia Guttentag (eds.). Handbook of Evaluation Research, Vol. I. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1975. Thomas, J. Alan. School Finance and Educational Opportunity in Michigan: Michigan School Finance Study. Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, 1968. Weiss, Carol H. Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972. Weiss, Carol H. Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hali, Inc., 1972. Articles Ainsworth, Barbara A, "Teachers Talk about Inservice Education." Journal of Teacher Education 27 (Summer, 1976):107-109. Alkin, Marvin C. "Evaluation Theory Development." In Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1972. Atkins, Myron J. "Governmental Roles." In Donald T. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education. San Francisco: JosseyBass Publishers, 1973. Blanchard, Robert W. "New Weapons in an Old War." In Donald J. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973. Brimm, Jack L. and Daniel J. Tollett. "How Do Teachers Feel About In-Service Education?" Educational Leadership 31 (March, 1974): 521-525. Burrell, David. "The Teacher Centre: A Critical Analysis." Leadership 33 (March, 1976):422-427. Educational Bush, Robert N. and Peter Enemark. "Control and Responsibility in Teacher Education." In Kevin Ryan (ed.), Teacher Education: The Seventy-fourth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975. Caldwell, Robert M. "Transplanting the British Teacher Center in the U.S." Phi Delta Kappan 60 (March, 1979):517-520. 141 Campbell, Donald T. "Reforms as Experiments." 24 (April, 1969):409-429. American Psychologist Crosby, J. Michael. "A Teacher Looks at Teaching Centers and Educa­ tional Reform." The Journal of Teacher Education 25:31-36. Devaney, Kathleen. "Warmth, Concreteness, Time, and Thought in Teachers1 Learning." In Kathleen Devaney (ed.), Essays on Teachers* Centers. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977. DeVault, M. Vere. "Teacher Centers: An International Concept." Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):37-39. The Donald, Marjorie N. "Implications of Nonresponse for the Interpretation of Mail Questionnaire Data." The Public Opinion Quarterly 24: 99-114. Drummond, William H. "Role of State Department of Education." In Donald J. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1973. Edelfelt, Roy A. "Inservice Education of Teachers: Priority for the Next Decade." The Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Summer, 1974):250-252. Edwards, Wards; Marcia Guttentag; and Kurt Snapper, "DecisionTheoretic Approach to Evaluation Research." In Elmer L. Struening and Marcia Guttentag (eds.), Handbook of Evaluation Research, Vol. I. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1975. Feitritzer, C. Emily. "The Role of USOE in Inservice." The Journal of Teacher Education 30 (January-February, 1979):36-38. Friedenberg, Edgar Z. "Critique of Current Practice." In Donald J. McCarty, New Perspectives on Teacher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1977. Guba, Egon G. "The Failure of Educational Evaluation." In Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972. Jackson, Philip W. "Old Dogs and New Tricks: Observations on Continuing Education of Teachers." In Louis J. Rubin, Improving Inservice Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1971, Kaplan, Leonard. "Survival Talk for Educators--on Teacher Centers." The Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):49-51. 142 McLaughlin, Milbry Wallin. "Pygmalion in the School District: Issues for Staff Development Programs." In Kathleen Devaney (ed.), Essays on Teachers’ Centers. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977. Miller, William C. "What's Wrong with In-Service Education? It's Topless!" Educational Leadership 35 (October, 1977):31-34. NEA Research. "Inservice Education." April, 1976):16. Today's Education 65 (March/ Rogers, Vincent R. "Why Teachers Centers in the U.S.?" Leadership 33 (March, 1976):406-412. Educational Rossi, Peter H.; James P. Wright; and Sonia R. Wright. "The Theory and Practice of Applied Social Research." Evaluation Quarterly 2 (May, 1978):171-193. Ryor, John. "Teacher Centers." (April/May, 1979):5. Editorial in Today's Education 68 Ryor, John; Albert Shanker; and J. T. Sandefur. on Inservice Education." 30 (January/February, 1979):13-19. "Three Perspectives Schmieder, Allen A., and Sam J. Yarger. "Teacher/Teaching Centering in America." The Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974): 5-12. Scriven, Michael and Jane Roth. "Needs Assessment: Concept and Prac­ tice." New Directions for Program Evaluation 1 (Spring, 1978): 1-11 . Smith, Emmitt D. "The State of the States in Teacher Centering." The Journal of Teacher Education 25 (Spring, 1974):21-25. Stephan, Stephen. "Prospects and Possibilities: The New Deal and the New Social Research." Social Forces 13 (May, 1935):515-521. Suchman, Edward A. "Action for What? A Critique of Evaluation Research." In Carol H. Weiss, Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972. Taylor, L. C. "Reflections on British Teachers' Centres." In Kathleen Devaney (ed.), Essays on Teachers' Centers. San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 1977. Tyler, Ralph W. "In-service Education of Teachers: A Look at the Past and Future." In Louis J. Rubin (ed.), Improving In-Service Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1971. 143 Weaver, Janice F. "Collaboration: Why is Sharing the Turf So Difficult?" The Journal of Teacher Education 30 (January/February, 1979): 24-25. Wilson, Woodrow. "The Study of Administration." Quarterly 2 (June, 1887):197-222. Political Science Unpublished Materials Act No. 252, Public Acts of 1975. Act No. 249, Public Acts of 1976. Act No. 209, Public Acts of 1977. Angius, Dushan. "The Appropriateness of Selected Inservice Education Practices as Perceived by Secondary School Educators." Unpub­ lished Ed.D. Thesis, University of the Pacific, 1974. Barnes, Richard Alan. "The Development of Teacher Education in Michigan." Part of a dissertation, Chicago: University of Chicago Libraries, 1942. Bettinghaus, Erwin P.; Richard V. Farace; and Peter R.Monge. "A State Plan for School Staff Development inMichigan." East Lansing: Communimetrics, Inc., 1978. (Zeroxed) Detroit Public Schools. "Budget Presentation: Court-Ordered Educa­ tional Components of the Desegregation Plan." June 9, 1978, Exhibit C. Edwards, Patsy Kaye Dernberger. "Teachers' Perceptions of Present Practices, Process-Needs, Alternative Delivery Systems and Priority of Inservice Education." Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1975. Federal Register. Vol. 43, No. 7, Wednesday, January 11, 1978. Florida Department of Education. "Florida Teacher Education Centers: A Review of Policy and Policy Implementation." Tallahassee: Florida Department of Education, 1977. Florida Statutes, Section 231.600. H.B. 4357. Holly, Mary Louise Hulbert. "A Conceptual Framework for PersonalProfessional Growth: Implications for Inservice Education." Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1977. 144 Jaquith, Charles Ervan. "An Analysis of Perceptions of Junior High/ Middle School Teachers, Principals, and University Specialists Concerning Inservice Education." Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1973. King, Charles Thomas. "Professional Development Needs as Perceived by Full-Time Teachers Not Pursuing Advanced Study and Factors Affecting Their Acceptance of Programs Designed to Meet Those Needs." Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Michigan State University, 1978. Michigan. Fifty-Sixth Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Lansing: State of: Michigan, 1892. Michigan. "Michigan School Report." Michigan State Library Collection. Michigan Department of Education. "Professional Development 1974-75 Interim Report." Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, revised October 10, 1974. (Zeroxed) Michigan Department of Education. "Professional Development Advisory Council Needs Assessment: Fall, 1977." Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, January 26, 1978. Michigan Department of Education. Program Revision Request— "Four State Project to Develop A System or Systems to Improve Student Achievement Through Staff Development," Unpublished form, Form PRR-2, FY 1978-79. Michigan Department of Education. "State Plan for Professional Develop­ ment of School Staffs." Lansing: Michigan Department of Education, December 7, 1977. Michigan Department of Management and Budget. The Michigan Educational Assessment Program: A Study of Test Score Utilization. Technical report 1978-1. Lansing: State of Michigan, 1978, Milliken, William G. State of Michigan Executive Budget: Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1974. Lansing: State of Michigan, 1973. P.L. 94-482, 1976. Porter, John W. Testimony presented to the Congressional Committee on Education and Labor, Representative William D. Ford, Chairman. Wayne County Intermediate School District, Wayne, Michigan, May 25, 1979. Special Senate Committee on Teacher Education. "The Training of Teachers in Michigan." Lansing: Michigan Senate, June 15, 1973. 145 Stingley, Ethelyn. Interview. Mason, June, 1979. Waskin, Yvonne Fisher. "The Teacher Center Movement in the United States and Its Implications for Teacher Education." Unpub­ lished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, 1976. APPENDICES APPENDIX A PROPOSED PLAN FOR TEACHER INSTITUTES APPENDIX A PROPOSED PLAN FOR TEACHER INSTITUTES FBOQKAU. A suggestive program is given below. The sine of the institute, the number of instructors, the specialties of the instructors and other varying conditions will make it necessary to depart from any program that might be laid down. The program given is intended simply to illustrate the plan: Instructor B. Instructor A. ?:no-9:IJ............. . . . ................... ' Theory and Art (Z) Recess. loao-toiis. . . . . . . 10:15-11:30.................... Science(1)............................. ................. Langauso .............................. 11:30-12:13.................... 12:15-1:30..................... Noon, 1:30-2:15..................... Music and drawing ( I ) . . . . . . . . ....... ... 2:15-3flO..._____ ____ Mpatc 3.00-3:15....................... drawing (2)...................... . Receu. Mathematics (2).......................... -........ jtlisto ry (t)........................................... - ........ Goneral exercises. Number* In parentbeil* represent year at tha coarse. NOTES. Ear the institutes to be held during 1802 the basis of classification should be about as follows: Alt those not holding certificates, aud those holding certificates below second grade who have' not taught five years, should take the firBt year’s work. All others should be permitted to take tho second year’s work. The conductor may vary from this classification where in his best judgment it seems advisable. The school commissioner will be able to render him invaluable assistance in deciding doubtful cases. The institute work should be based on the course of reading that is pro­ posed. The result of this concentration of effort will be that the examina­ tions from this department may be more thorough, and the institute may approach toward a system of instrnction. Teachers who do not attend the institute may prepare for examination by the study of the above nain»d books. But it ought to bo understood that a teacher who doee not attend loses much that private study cannot supply. Teachers are urged to do as much of the reading as they can before the institutes for the summer of 1802 are held; but no attempt ought to he 146 147 concentrating the work on a few subjects and treating only so many topics in each as can bo done thoroughly, we do not say exhaustively, much good will result. T H E COMMISSIONERS. In carrying out the institute plan as outlined the commissioners can give invaluable aid. Their acquaintance and official relations with the teachers of the county will give them a knowledge that will be of service in classifying the institute into grades and in passing upon the fitness of the members for promotion. Whatever organization may be made iii tho county for the systematic prosecution of the work throughout the school year will, almost of neces­ sity, have to receivo its impetus from the commissioner. TEA0HER8’ ASSOCIATIONS. It might bo suggested that the township and county Associations, now in successful operation in many of the counties, could be made to contribute somewhat to the success of the course of study. In meetings of the town­ ship association, which should be held monthly, at least an hour could be devoted to a systematic review or quiz based 011 somo one of the books read. In the meetings of the county association an hour might be spent in a similar way. Written reviews of the books in the course, and papers on institute topics might be made a part of the regular association pro­ gram. Live, active commissioners will find many ways of contributing to the success of this work. Basing its hopes on its past observation this department expects from the large majority of tho school commissiouers a hearty cooperation. COURSE OF STUDY. FIRST lilt ADR. 1. Tueohv and Art and Bcuool Law , Report* and Record*. Legal Powers and Da ties of the Teacher. Organisation of School. Daily Program. Grading District Schools. —Lec­ ture* and Recitations. * Page'.t Thorny and Practice of Teaching. State Manual and Course of Stwin. *11. Lanovaoe. Modal Lossons in Written and Oral Language. Lessons in 1st, 2d, 3d, ItU Readers. Kelp* in Teaching Reading.—Kuetey. III. ScUHt'OB. General Geography—Essential Facts, Methods of lllnstrntion, etc. Elemontnry Physiology—Stimulants and Narcot­ ics.—Recitations with Illustrative Material. The Teaching of Geography—Geike. IV. M a t h e m a t ic s . Modal Lessons in Primary Arithmetic. V. Hisroav. Toachablo Points of United States History.— Ono or mors topics dorsiopod by model recita­ tions. W*torg and Constitution.—■I'ohnrion. VI. Mono and Drawing. Instruction in Music {optional). Method* in Penmanship. SECOND GRADE. I. Theory and Art. School Management. Government and Disci­ pline. General Principles of Right Mothod. School Sanitation. Morals.—Lectures and Recitations. Primer o f Pedagogy,—Putnam. Ethic*fo r Young People.—Everett. II. L ahovaob. Technical Grammar.—Recitations. Lltcratnro.—Study of Masterpiece—Reading and Recitations. Grammar.— Whitney it Lockwood. M'hittter'e Snow Round. III. Soienob. Elementary Science.—Loetnrcs and Recitations. Physiology.—Topioal Study and Rocitattons. Pricier of Science,—Bert. IV. Mathematics. Mental Arithmetic.—Model Recitations. Advanced Work.—Rocltatlons. V. HtsTonv, Civil Government.—Recitations. Civil Government.—fiik e . VI. MCSIO AND D b AWINO. instruction In Mnsio (optional) Instruction In Drawing (optional). ♦ Titles of books required for tho coarse of rrading are printed in italics. APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE F o r this survey, professional development is defined as a planned and organized effort to provide teach ers and o ther educational workers w ith th e knowledge and skills necessary to facilitate improved student learning and performance and to m eet additional needs of students. These activities include workshops, seminars, credit and non-credit courses, in-service training conferences, e tc . Part I - Characteristics of Professional Development Services In order to develop s ta te policy regarding professional developm ent, we would like to know w hat is im portant to you. Listed below a re som e c h ara c teristic s o f professional developm ent a c tiv itie s th a t m ight be im portant. Would you please respond to each item below by indicating how im portant it is in regard to your own expectatio n s for professional developm ent activ ities. For e a c h ch a ra c te ristic listed below, please check th e box which best describes th e im portance o f th a t c h a ra c te ristic to you. C h aracteristic o f Professional Developm ent A ctivities O f G re at Im portance O f Some Im portance □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 0 □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ fl □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ .— . □ □ □ Essential Not R elevant (*) 1. Well organized 2. Conveniently lo cated 3. A convenient tim e 4. No financial co st to me 5. I have th e opportunity to help in planning professional de­ velopm ent a c tiv itie s 6. R elevant to my teaching situ a­ tion 7. R elevant to d istric t needs 8. Im proves my aw areness o f and/or skills in dealing with im portant cu rren t develop­ m ents 9. P ra c tic a l and useful 10. I can earn college cred it 11. I have th e opportunity to share ideas w ith o th er teach ers 12. Resource people a re knowl­ edgeable and experienced 13. I receive personal, individu­ alized help 14. There is follow through until I have achieved the desired com petency 148 a (is 149 Fart n - Professional Development Experience IS. In the p ast tw elve m onths, have you p articip ate d in professional developm ent a c tiv itie s conducted by your local school d is tric t o th e r th a n those conducted by th e K ent Professional Developm ent C en ter, Region 12 Professional De­ velopm ent C en ter, or the D etroit C en ter for Professional G rowth and De­ velopm ent? 1 Y e s----------------------------------------------*2 No (If no, please skip to question 21) If yes: 16. How many d iffe re n t locally conducted a ctiv itie s did you atten d ? 17. IS . Throughout th e p ast tw elve m onths, what w ere th e to ta l num ber of hours you spent atten d in g professional developm ent a ctiv itie s conducted by your local d istric t? . On th e average, w ere you able to apply w hat you learned a t these locally conducted professional developm ent a c tiv itie s to your teaching? 1 2 3 4 9 20. ( ( z j 22 - Each o f th e following descriptions can be used to c h ara c teriz e the professional developm ent services which you have received. Please indicate the e x te n t to which you agree or disagree w ith each item in the list. Use 1 to rep resen t "strongly agree," 2 to indicate "agree," 3 to indicate "disagree," 4 to represent "strongly disagree," and 9 to indicate "no opinion." Well organized Conveniently located A convenient tim e Had th e opportunity to help in planning professional developm ent a c tiv itie s R elevant to my teaching situation ^R elev an t to d istric t needs ^Im proved my aw areness o f and/or skills in dealing w ith im portant c u rre n t developm ents P ra c tic a l and useful Earn ed college c re d it (code as eith er 1 or 4) Opportunity to share ideas with other teachers Knowledgeable and experienced resource people Good personal, individualized help Follow through until com petency was achieved Oth e r: please specify 19. 0 *> (*•) (2 7) ( 2 «) (*») (so) {»*) (J2) (»») (sit) (»») (so) (»?) (»•) (*») M Yes, a great, deal Yes, som e Yes, a little No D on't know, no opinion. In th e m ajority o f instances where you received professional develop­ m ent services from your local school d istric t, did you: 1 R eceive these services fre e 2 Pay for less th an 50% o f th e co st 3 P ay for m ore than 50% o f the cost 9 D on't know ( H i) z ) ») 150 21. In the past 12 months have you participated in professional development activitiesconductedbyVourintermediatedistrict? 1 Y e s ---------------------------------------- _____ _ 2 No (If no, please skip to question 27) <«) If yes: 22. How many d ifferen t in term ed iate level a c tiv itie s did you a tte n d ? _____ 23. 24. Throughout th e past 12 m onths, what w ere th e to ta l num ber o f hours you spent atten d in g professional developm ent a c tiv itie s conducted by your interm ediate d is tr ic t? ______ On th e average, w ere you able to apply w hat you learned a t these in term ed iate level professional developm ent a c tiv itie s to your teaching? 1 2 3 4 9 26. (06- 06 ) Each o f the following descriptions can be used to c h a rac terize the professional developm ent services which you have received. Please indicate th e ex ten t to which you agree or disagree with each item in the list. Use 1 to represent "strongly ag ree," 2 to indicate "agree," 3 to indicate "disagree," 4 to represent "strongly disagree," and 9 to indicate "no opinion." Well organized Conveniently located A convenient tim e Had th e opportunity to help in planning professional developm ent a c tiv itie s P ertin en t and relevant to my teaching situation R elevant to d istric t needs. Improved my aw areness o f and/or skills in dealing with im portant cu rren t developm ents P ra c tic a l and useful Earned college c re d it (code as e ith er 1 or 4) O pportunity to share ideas with o th er teach ers Knowledgeable and experienced resource people Good personal, individualized help Follow through until com petency was achieved O ther; please specify_________________________ 25. ( H J - O S) Yes, a g re a t deal Yes, some Yes, a little No D on't know, no opinion In th e m ajority of instances where you received professional develop­ m ent services from your interm ediate school d istric t, did you: 1 R eceive these services free 2 Pay for less than 50% o f th e cost 3 Pay for more than 50% o f the cost 9 D on't know (o*) (»o) (»l ) (62 ) (»» ) (»0 ) (»S) ! (»7 ) | (»•) i ( » » ) I (•#) ; («*) I (62 ) i (•») 151 27. In the p ast tw elve months, have you p articip ated in professional developm ent a c tiv itie s conducted by higher education institutions? 1 Yes ------------------------------------------------------2 No (If no, please skip to question 33) If yes: 28. How many a f f e r e n t higher education a c tiv ities did you a tte n d ? (con­ sider a course as one a c tiv ity )______ 29. Throughout the p ast tw elve months, w hat w ere th e to ta l num ber of hours you spent attending professional developm ent activ ity conducted by higher education in stitu tio n s? ______ 30. Each o f th e following descriptions can b e used to ch a rac teriz e the professional developm ent services which you have received. Please indicate th e e x te n t to which you agree or disagree w ith each item in the list. Use 1 to rep resen t "strongly agree," 2 to indicate "agree," 3 to indicate "disagree," 4 to represent "strongly disagree," and 9 to indicate "no opinion." Well organized C onveniently located A convenient tim e Had th e opportunity to help in planning professional developm ent ac tiv itie s P e rtin e n t and relevant to my teaching situation R elevant to d istric t needs Improved my aw areness o f and/or skills in dealing with im portant c u rre n t developm ents P ra c tic a l and useful Earned college cred it (code as e ith e r 1 or 4) Opportunity to share ideas w ith other teach ers Knowledgeable and experienced resource people Good personal, individualized help Follow through until com petency is achieved Oth e r; please specify 31. On th e average w ere you able to apply w hat you learned a t these higher education professional developm ent ac tiv itie s to your teaching? 1 2 3 4 9 32. Yes, a g re a t deal Yes, some Yes, a little No Don't know, no opinion In th e m ajority o f instances w here you received professional develop­ m ent services from a higher education institution, did you: 1 R eceive these services free 2 Pay for less than 50% o f the co st 3 Pay for more than 50% o f th e cost 9 Don't know 152 33. In the past 12 m onths, have you p articip ated in professional developm ent a c tiv itie s conducted by th e Kent Professional Developm ent C enter, the Region 12 Professional Developm ent C en ter, or th e D etro it C enter for Pro­ fessional Development and Growth? 1 Yes---------------------------------------------- -------2 No (If no, please skip to question 39) If yess 34. How many d iffe re n t c e n te r conducted a c tiv itie s did you a tte n d ? _______ 35. Throughout th e past tw elve months, what w ere th e to ta l num ber of hours you spent atten ding professional developm ent a c tiv itie s conducted by a professional developm ent c e n te r ? ______ 36. Each o f th e following descriptions can be used to ch a ra cterize the professional developm ent services which you have received. Please indicate th e e x te n t to which you agree or disagree w ith each item in the list. Use 1 to represent "strongly agree," 2 to indicate "agree," 3 to indicate "disagree," 5 to indicate "strongly disagree," and 9 to indicate "no opinion." Well organized Conveniently located A convenient tim e Had the opportunity to help in planning professional developm ent a c tiv itie s P e rtin e n t and relevant to my teaching situation R elevant to d istrict needs Improved my awareness o f and/or skills in dealing w ith im portant c u rre n t developm ents P ra c tic a l and useful Earned college c re d it (code as e ith er 1 or 4) O pportunity to share ideas with o ther teachers Knowledgeable and experienced resource people Good personal, individualized help Follow through until com petency was achieved O ther; please specify 37. On th e average, w ere you able to apply w hat you learned a t these locally conducted professional developm ent a ctiv itie s to your teaching? 1 2 3 4 9 38. Yes, a g re a t deal Yes, some i Y es, a little No D on't know, no opinion. In the m ajority o f instances where you received services from any one o f those professional developm ent centers, did you: 1 2 3 9 R eceive those services free Pay less than 50% o f the cost Pay m ore than 59% o f the cost D on't know 153 Part ID - Attitudes Toward Professional Development 39. Some people feel th a t th e current system for providing professional develop­ m ent services to teach ers should be expanded; others oppose the idea for a v a rie ty of reasons. When you think about the need for such services and you consider th e co sts a s well as benefits, would you: 1 strongly support th e expansion o f professional developm ent services ‘2 weakly support th e expansion o f professional developm ent services '3 weakly oppose th e expansion o f professional developm ent services ‘4 strongly oppose th e expansion of professional developm ent services '9 Don't know, no opinion 40. The basic argum ent for expanding professional developm ent services is th a t many te a c h e rs can use assistance in improving th e ir teaching skills. Do you feel you would benefit if the professional developm ent services available now w ere expanded? 1 Yes, I could b en efit a g re a t deal from those services '2 Yes, I could b en efit from those services, but only to a sm all ex ten t ‘3 No, I would not b enefit from these services '9 Don’t know, no opinion 41. T here a re a variety of organizations which currently conduct professional developm ent a ctiv ities. Among these are local school d istricts, interm ediate school d istric ts, universities and S tate D epartm ent of Education professional developm ent cen ters. Regardless o f your prior experience w ith professional developm ent a ctiv ities, which o f the organizations listed below could best provide the services you would want for your own professional developm ent? Using th e c rite ria you established on the first page o f this questionnaire, ra te each option below on a scale ranging from zero to five. A score of "0" would indicate th a t th e option fails to m eet your expectations while a score of "5V im plies it does so fully. Options R ate each option on a scale from zero to five (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). R ecord your responses in th e unfilled boxes beside each option. In term ed iate d istricts S ta te D epartm ent o f Education C enters U niversities Local school d istricts (**) (»»> (»*) (>•) 154 Part IV - Background Information 42. Would you please indicate w hat your a re a o f teaching responsibility is? CHECK THE ONE AREA YOU TEACH IN MOST _1 self-co n tain ed elem entary "2 counselor, special education " o r reading _3 librarian or media specialist "4 language a rts or social sciences 5 m ath or science 43. _8 physical education ~7 music or a rt ~8 home economics, in­ dustrial a rts , or business education _9 foreign languages A t w hat level do you teach m ost of the tim e? 1 early elem entary (K-3) 2 la te elem entary (4-6) 3 all elem en tary (K-6) 4 middle school (6-8) 44. 5 "6 ”7 ”8 junior high (7-9) senior high (9-12) a ll secondary (7-12) all grades (K-12) (»•) What is your level o f education? 1 2 3 ]_____4 5 6 7 45. («> Less than B.A. or B.S. Bachelors D egree Bachelors D egree plus some course work M asters D egree M asters D egree plus some course work Education Specialist Ed.D. or Ph.D. (»»> Would you please indicate your certific atio n standing? Check th e ONE cate ­ gory th a t applies to th e ce rtific atio n th a t you are currently using to teach. 1 provisional 2 perm anent 3 continuing 4 30-hour continuing 5 6 7 8 9 annual vocational authorization tem porary vocational authorization full vocational authorization perm it O ther. S p e cify _____________ to) 46. How many years o f teaching experience have you h a d ? ______ («w «a) 47. Is your p rim ary teach in g responsibility in th e a re a o f your minor or major c e rtific atio n ? («») 1 Major 2 Minor 3 I am not now c e rtifie d to teach in the are a o f my prim ary teaching responsibilities. 48. In w hat county is your school d istric t lo c a te d ? ___________________ <«*-•») 49. What is the approxim ate to ta l student population o f your school d istric t? (*•) 1 56,000 o r ev er 2 10,000 to 49,999 3 3,500 to 9,999 4 1,500 to 3,499 5 leas than 1,500 9 D on't know 155 50. Would you please check any of the following provisions th a t are Included in your c u rre n t teaching co n tract. requires th e local d istric t to provide in-service training. requires th a t teach ers p artic ip a te in planning in-service training. req u ires your local d istric ts to pay for course expenses d irectly re la te d to your work. requires you to have professional developm ent to receive pay increases. J *7 ? { *• ' ( e *) . . ' 70' APPENDIX C FIELD TEST QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX C FIELD TEST QUESTIONNAIRE Survey of K-12 Teachers Professional Development Preferences and Needs I. Background Information: A. My area of teaching responsibility is: (check the one area you teach in most.) _self-contained elementary classroom ’ counselor librarian or media specialist special education reading language arts ' math ' science pother. Specify_____ B. I teach most of the time at the following level: K 1-3 4-6 C. _social sciences physical education music art foreign language home economics industrial arts business education 7-9 ‘ 10-12 Level of Education Less than B.A. or B.S. Bachelors Degree ' Bachelors Degree plus some course work | Masters Degree ’ Masters Degree plus some course work ' Education Specialist ‘ Ed.D. or Ph.D. D. My certification standing is _provisional "permanent . continuing 130-hour continuing .other. Specify___ . annual vocational authorization ‘ temporary vocational authorization | full vocational authorization ‘permit E. Years teaching experience: _____ F. Is your primary teaching responsibility in your major field of study? Yes No 150 157 G. Would you participate in professional development activities if they were offered? Yes 1. No If yes, in which area? _ __ __ classroom and building management skills ______ individualized instruction improving student self-image improving teaching strategies 2. Of the above that you have checked, what is your preferred way of getting that professional development? from your local school district. Why?_________________ from the intermediate district. Why? from a higher education institution. Why? from your teacher organization. Why? from a SDE professional development center. Why?