Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Proposal Dissertation Defense, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Dissertation Chair/Major Professor

April 2007

The Differences in Professional Development Training Between

Private Corporations and Public Education

A Proposal DefenseBy

Yolanda E. SmithWilliam Allan Kritsonis, PhD

Dissertation Chair

Committee Members

William Allan Kritsonis, Ph.D.(Dissertation Chair)

Ben C. DeSpain, Ed.D(Member)

Douglas Hermond, Ph.D.(Member)

David Herrington, Ph.D.(Member)

Camille Gibson, Ph.D.(Outside Member)

Outline

I. The Problem

II. Purpose of Study

III. Research Questions [5]

IV. Hypotheses (3)

V. Significance of the Study

VI. Review of Literature

VII. Research Design

The Whole Pie of Problems

Retention16%

Shortage16%

P.D17%

Morale17%

Salary17%

Student Achievement17%

The Problem Slice

ProfessionalDevelopment

The Problem

“Until we improve the methods used to measure the links among professional development, teacher performance, and student achievement, educators will be unable to convince parents, community leaders, and local school boards to provide the sufficient time and funding necessary to improve our teachers’ understanding and our students’ performance” (Hackett, 2005).

I. Purpose of the Study

To compare the professional development training programs in the corporate business world with the professional development training programs in the public education systems using Guskey 2000 model.

Research Questions (1)

What are the differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training between educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?

(Quantitative)

Research Question (2)

What are the differences in participants learning in professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?

(Quantitative)

Research Question (3) What are the differences in

organizational support for professional development between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?

(Quantitative)

Research Questions (4) What are the differences in participants’ use of knowledge

and skills gained from their professional development training program provided by private corporations and public education as measured by Guskey’s Model?

(Qualitative)

(Qualitative)

Research Question (5) What are the differences in how the

evaluation of participants’ learning outcomes is determine between private corporation and public education as measured by Guskey’s model?

(Qualitative)

III. Hypotheses

Ho1 There are no statistically significant differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training provided between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool.

Hypotheses

Ho2 There are no statistically significant differences in participants’ learning throughout their professional development training outcomes between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool.

Hypotheses

Ho3 There are no statistically significant differences in organizational support for professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool.

IV. Significance of the Study (1)

Education is a business. Advocates for Human Resource and Educators feel the pressure to prove that the efforts giving to professional development training is making a difference in performance.

Significance of the Study (2)

Knowledge gained from the study will provide educational leaders with information about how the quality of professional development training may eliminate teacher shortages and enhance their performance.

V. Review of Literature

PD Overview/HistoricalPast ResearchVariables InvestigatedGuskey Model

Review of LiteratureOverview/Historical

What is Professional Development?NSDCASTDGuskeyHistory

Review of LiteratureMiller, 2006

Professional

Development in a

Large School

District: An

Application of

Guskey’s Model

Grade one teachers,

mentors and principals Participants’ Reactions, Knowledge and Skills, Organizational Support, Participants’ Use of

knowledge, Impact

Case Study; Quantitative and

Qualitative

Research linking Professional Development with student achievement in

language arts.

Greene, 2005Quality Matters: A Different Perspective on the Relationship Between School Resources and Student Outcomes

303 Public Comprehensive High Schools in New Jersey

Outcome Variables (Language Arts, Math gain scores) Predictor Variables (Environment & Resource)

Quantitative (Correlational)

Research on more efficient and effective allocation strategies

Author's/year/Title Population/Sample Variables Methodology Future Research

Review of LiteratureAuthor's/year/Title Population/Sample Variables Methodology Future

Research

Tsarouhas, 2004

Understanding

organizational context for

the evaluation of training

outcomes: A multi-site case

study in the community

mental health sector

Four organizations in the mental health sector. 22 participants were

interviewed

Guskey 3rd level (Organizational support and change)

Qualitative only

(Interviews) Various sectors beside education should be used by Guskey’s

model.

Lowden, 2003

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Professional Development

Certified K-12 teachers in two districts in New York state.

Participants’ Satisfaction, Participants’ Learning, Organizational Support and Change, Participants’ Knowledge, Student learning, Teachers Attitudes/beliefs

Quantitative (Survey only)

Research on PD based on the New Reform; Replicated on a larger population; Teacher perception of PD & teacher evaluation process

Review of LiteratureVariables

• Participants’ Reactions

• Participants’ Learning

• Organizational Support

• Participants’ Use of Knowledge and Skills

• Students Outcomes

Guskey 2000 Model

EvaluationLevel

What Questions Are Addressed?

How will information be gathered?

What is Measured or Assessed?

How will information be used?

1. Participants’ Reactions Did they like it?Was their time well spent?Did the material make sense?Will it be useful?Was the leader knowledgeable and helpful?Were the refreshments fresh and tasty?Was the room the right temperature?Were the chairs comfortable?

Questionnaires administered at the end of the session.Focus groupsInterviewsPersonal learning logs

Initial satisfaction with the experience

To improve program design and delivery

2. Participants’ Learning Did participants acquire the intended knowledge and skills/

Paper-and-pencil instrumentsSimulations and demonstrationsParticipant reflections (oral and/or written)Participant portfoliosCase study analyses

New knowledge and skills of participants

To improve program content, format, and organization

Guskey 2000 Model

3. Organization support and change

What was the impact on the organization?Did it affect organizational climate and procedures?Was implementation advocated, facilitated, and supported?Was the support public and overt?Were the problems addressed quickly and efficiently?Were sufficient resources made available?Were successes recognized and shared?

District and school recordsMinutes from follow-up meetingsQuestionnairesFocus groupsStructured interviews with participants and school or district administratorsParticipants portfolios

The organization’s advocacy, support, accommodation, facilitation, and recognition.

To document and improve organizational supportTo inform future change efforts

4. Participants’ use of new knowledge and skills

Did participants effectively apply the new knowledge and skills/

QuestionnairesStructured interviews with participants and their supervisorsParticipant reflections (oral and/or written)Participant portfoliosDirect observationsVideo-or audiotapes

Degree and quality of implementationTo document and improve the implementation of program content

EvaluationLevel

What Questions Are Addressed?

How will information be gathered?

What is Measured or Assessed?

How will information be used?

Guskey 2000 ModelEvaluation

LevelWhat Questions Are

Addressed?How will information be

gathered?What is Measured or

Assessed?How will information be

used?

5. Student learning outcomes

What was the impact on students?

Did it affect student performance or achievement?

Did it influence students’ physical or emotional well being?

Are students more confident as leaders?

Is student attendance improving? Are dropout

decreasing?

Student records

School records Questionnaires

Structured interviews

with students, parents,

teachers, and/or

administrators•

Participant portfolios

Student learning outcomes:

-Cognitive (performance and achievement)

-Affective (attitudes and dispositions)

-Affective (attitudes and dispositions)

Psychomotor (skills and

behaviors)

To focus and improve all aspects of program design, implementation, and follow-up

To demonstrate the overall impact of

professional development

How to Use Guskey’s Model

****Work the model backwards****

Level 5

Level 4

Level 3

Level 2

Level 1

VI. Research Design Research Method: Mixed- Methods using an explanatory design.

Quantitative The quantitative data will be collected first on Participants’ Reaction,

Participants’ Learning, Organizational Support, & Participants’ Use of Knowledge and Skills using the PDAT web-based survey/questionnaire tool.

http://pdat.speedsurvey.com

Qualitative The qualitative data will be collected in two parts; Questionnaires and

interviews in order to identify the over all quality and effectiveness of professional development provided to employees.

InstrumentationPilot Study

Convenience Sampling

30 NASA employees

30 Educators within HISD Test-Retest

Reliability

Trust-worthiness (Fair-Clear-Free of

Bias)

Changes based on inputsParticipants Excluded

Subjects of the Study

Sampling Method Purposive Sampling first, for selection

of School District and Private Corporation.

Cluster Random Sampling second, for selecting the schools and departments.

Cluster Sampling

HS,MS,ES,HS,MS,ES,OSAdmin Bldg

HS, ES, MS,HS,MS,ESHS,ES,MS,HS,MS,ESHS,MS,ES,HS,MS,ES

HS,MS,ES,HS,MS,ES, OS,Admin Bldg, Admin Bldg

Admin Bldg

Analysis of Data

• QuantitativeResearch Questions Hypothesis Independent

VariablesDependentVariables

Statistics

What are the differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development

Assessment Tool?

Ho1 There are no

statistically significant difference in participants’ reactions regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment

Tool?

Two Groups:

Public Educators

Corporate Employees

Participants’ Reactions

T-test for independent variables

Weighted Means1 = SD2 = D3 = NA4 = A5 = SA

What are the differences in participants’ learning in professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?

Ho2 There are no

statistically significant differences in participants’ learning in professional development training between public educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment Tool?.

Two Groups:

Public Educators

Corporate Employees

Participants’ Learning

T-test for independent variablesWeighted Means1 = SD2 = D3 = NA4 = A5 = SA

Analysis of Data

• Quantitative

Research Questions Hypothesis IndependentVariables

DependentVariables

Statistics

What are the differences in organizational support regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development

Assessment Tool?

Ho1 There are no

statistically significant difference in organizational support regarding the professional development training between pubic educators and corporate employees as measured by the Professional Development Assessment

Tool?

Two Groups:

Public Educators

Corporate Employees

Organizational Support

T-test for independent variables

Weighted Means1 = SD2 = D3 = NA4 = A5 = SA

Analysis of Data

Qualitative

Surveys/Questionnaire & Interviews

Record all I hear

Coding UsingNVivo

Software

Use Frequency TablePercentages will be

Calculated and ListedIn Descending order

Analysis of DataQuantitative

TEA/Districts/School Data/Companies HR Data base/Fill in the blanks surveys

Qualitative

Interview ofEducators &Corporate Management

Questionnaires of employees

TriangulationValidation

Selected ReferencesFraenkel, J.R. & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate

research in education. (6th ed.) McGraw Hill: New York, N.Y.

Guskey, T.R. (2000). Evaluation professional development. Corwin Press, Inc. Thousand Oaks, California.

Hackett, J. (2005). Exploring the links among professional development: Teacher performance, and student achievement. (Dissertation) Pro-Quest Information and Learning Company, (UMI No. 3169621).

National Staff Development Counsel (2006). Standards. Retrieved on October 27, 2006. from http://www.nsdc.org/standards/about/index.cfm.