Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis

8/14/2019 Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dr-yolanda-e-smith-phd-dissertation-defense-dissertation-chair-dr-william 1/72

Differences in Professional

Development Training Between OneCorporation and One Large Texas

Public School District

A Dissertation Defense

By

Yolanda E. SmithWilliam Allan Kritsonis, PhD

Dissertation Chair



January 1, 2010 Yolanda E. Smith 2

Committee Members

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

Ben C. DeSpain, Ed.D

Camille Gibson, Ph.D.

Douglas Hermond, Ph.D.

David Herrington, Ph.D.




Dissertation Defense Format

I. The ProblemII. Purpose of Study

III. Conceptual

Framework

IV. MethodsV. Research Questions

[5]

VI. Hypotheses (4)

VII. Subjects of the StudyVIII. Quantitative Major

Findings and Reviewof Literature

IX. Analysis of Data(Qualitative)

X. Conclusions

XI. Recommendations




Concerns in Education

Retention

Shortage

Professional

DevelopmentMorale

Salary

Student Achievement




I. The Problem

“Until we improve the methods used tomeasure the links among professionaldevelopment, teacher performance, andstudent achievement, educators will beunable to convince parents, community

leaders, and local school boards toprovide the sufficient time and fundingnecessary to improve our teachers’understanding and our students’

performance” (Hackett, 2005).




II. Purpose of the Study

To compare the professional

development training programs in the

corporate business world with the

professional development trainingprograms in the public education

systems using Guskey’s 2000 model.


http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dr-yolanda-e-smith-phd-dissertation-defense-dissertation-chair-dr-william 7/72January 1, 2010 Yolanda E. Smith 7

Purpose of the Study

To determine by what methods do the

private corporation and the public

education system use in evaluating the

overall effectiveness of their professional development programs.



III. Conceptual Framework

Guskey’s Model

Learning

Reactions Outcomes

Organization

Support

Use of

Knowledge &

Skills

Quality

&



IV. Methods



Methods

(Quantitative)

Survey

Descriptive Statistics

T-Test for Independent Samples



Methods

(Qualitative)

Questionnaire

3 open ended questions

Interviews

Corporate managers

School district administrators




V. Quantitative Research Questions

1. What are the differences in participants’ reactions regarding the professional

development training between public

educators and corporate employees as

measured by the ProfessionalDevelopment Assessment Tool

(PDAT)?




Quantitative Research Question

2. What are the differences in participants’

learning in professional development

training between public educators and

corporate employees as measured byPDAT?





3. What are the differences inorganizational support for professionaldevelopment between public educatorsand corporate employees as measured

by PDAT?





4. What are the differences in participants’ use of

knowledge and skills gained from their professional

development training program provided by the

corporate sector and public education as measured by

PDAT?

(Qualitative)




Qualitative Research Question

5. What are the differences in how theevaluation of participants’ learning outcomes is determined between thecorporate sector and public education

as measured by Guskey’s model?




VI. Null Hypothesis

Ho1There are no statistically significant

differences in participants’ reactions

regarding the professional development

training provided between publiceducators and corporate employees as

measured by PDAT.




Null Hypothesis


differences in participants’ learning

throughout their professional

development training between publiceducators and corporate employees as

measured by PDAT.




Null Hypothesis


differences in organizational support for

professional development training

between public educators and corporateemployees as measured by PDAT.




Null Hypothesis


differences in participants’ use of

knowledge and skills gained from their

professional development trainingprogram provided by the corporate

sector and public education as

measured by PDAT.




Instrumentation

Pilot Study

Purposive Sampling

30 NASA employees

30 Educators within one HISD

Test-Retest

Reliability Coefficient = +.88

Changes based on inputs from

Professional Development Experts




VII. Subjects of the Study

Quantitative

Educators: 735 invited; 475 responded.

Corporate Employees: 476 invited; 304

responded.Total participants invited 1211; 779

responded.

Overall Response Rate was 64%.




VIII. Major Findings: Quantitative

Research Question 1

Ho1There are no statistically significant differences in participants’

reactions regarding the professional development trainingprovided between public educators and corporate employees as

measured by PDAT.

Reactions N Mean SD t Sig

(2-tailed)

Public SchoolDistrict

465 20.70 4.15 3.736* .000

Private Corporation 307 19.68 2.86

*Significant at p ≤ 0.05

Decision: Reject Null Hypothesis




Quotes from School District Employees’

“It has affected me positively.”

“Positively, when able to implement.”

“The more chances I have to

implement new skills the better I feel.”




Participants’ Reactions

Review of Literature

Comments from participants will tend to be more positive

when the content addresses specific problems and offers

practical, relevant solutions that can be implemented

immediately (Guskey, 2000).

Reactions of participants should be measured on all

programs for two reasons: to let the participants know that

trainers value their reactions, and to measure their

reactions and obtain suggestions for improvements(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2005).




Major Findings: Quantitative

Research Question 2Ho

2There are no statistically significant differences in participants’

learning throughout their professional development training

between public educators and corporate employees as measured

by PDAT.

Learning N Mean SD t Sig

(2-tailed)


463 19.83 4.34 5.482* .000

PrivateCorporations

303 18.24 3.22

*Significant p ≤ 0.05






“I learn what other teachers do that

works and other teachers learn from me.

To be successful at any job, you have to

communicate with others, learn andchange.”

“Sometimes it’s good to hear other

teachers talk about their solutions tovarious issues.”




Participants’ Learning


Champion (2003) states yearlong training programs is another

method used to determine participants’ learning by giving

participants ongoing projects and allowing peers or program

leaders to gather the data through observations.





Research Question 3

Ho3There are no statistically significant differences in organizational

support for professional development training between public

educators and corporate employees as measured by PDAT.

Org Support N Mean SD t Sig.

(2-tailed)

Public School District 462 18.81 4.45 -2.049* .041

Private Corporations 304 19.42 3.26






Quotes from Corporate Employees’

“Having a supportive manager goes a

long way in affecting employees’

positively including inspiring us to learn

new things.”

“ I love having tuition reimbursement

for development outside the company

and most importantly the support mymanager gives me in attending school.”




Organizational Support


Guskey (2000) stressed that without a systemic approach,organizational factors can hinder or prevent the success of improvement efforts, even when the individual aspects of professional development are done correctly.

Tsarouhas (2004) stated every organization ventures intotraining in order to meet some intended goal or objective for thepurpose of organizational growth.

Lowden (2003) discovered that teachers who had the mosteffective professional development experiences positively

evaluated the organization’s support and change.





Research Question 4

Ho4 There are no statistically significant differences in participants’use of knowledge and skills gained from their professionaldevelopment training program provided by the corporate sector and public education as measured by PDAT.

Knwldg. Skills N Mean SD t Sig.(2-tailed)


459 17.45 3.67 6.069* .000

PrivateCorporations 306 16.01 2.32







“In reading class, I think I can easily

give examples which are related to life

and let my students see the connections

to their own lives.”

“Watching students learn based on

something new I learned and taught is

great.”

Participants’ Use of Knowledge




Participants Use of Knowledge

and Skills


“The best professional development helps teachers to thinkcritically about their practice; to develop new instructionalstrategies, along with new techniques for creating curriculumand assessments; and to measure how new practices haveaffected student learning” (Kelleher, 2003, p.751).

Trainers in the business world have struggled for decades tosolve the transfer problem: getting people who havedemonstrated that they understand learning to actually applywhat they have learned on the job (Salopek, 2006).




Overall Effectiveness

Effectiveness Number Mean S.D. t Sig.(2-tailed)


444 76.70 14.91 3.600* .000

Private Corporation 296 73.19 9.36

* Significant at p ≤ 0.05




IX. Analysis of Data

Qualitative

Questionnaire

& Interviews

Responses

NVivo

Software

was used for

coding

Frequency andpercentages were

calculated & listed

in descending order




Qualitative Research Question

5. What are the differences in how theevaluation of participants’ learning

outcomes is determined between the

corporate sector and public education

as measured by Guskey’s model?




Open Ended Questions used to answer

Research Question 5

1. In what ways have your professionaldevelopment training impacted your

work performance?

2. In what ways have your professionaldevelopment training affected your

attitude about learning new things?

3. In what ways have your professional

development training enhanced your skills or behaviors?




1. In what ways have your professional development

training impacted your work performance?

Emergent Themes Private Corporations

Freq. Percent

Public School District

Freq. Percent

Learned skills essential to job

30 14.8 62 17.3

Increasedproductivity/efficiency

24 11.8 68 19.0

Learned something new 22 10.8 36 10.0

Familiar with better techniques

20 9.8 54 15.1

Improved Human Relation 19 9.3 7 2.0

Minimal or no impact 18 8.9 42 11.7




Corporate Employees’

Response from Questionnaire

“Positive impact – understanding of how

my behavior and actions affect others.”

“It has made things a little better in terms

of dealing with people.”






“I have learned how to listen toothers and what they are really saying

underneath all their blustering to get at the heart of the issue. I used to get defensive and fight back, now I caneasily defuse a situation and turn it intoa positive experience for everyone.”




School District Employees’


“It has increased my productivity and

ability to reach my students.”

“It depends on how it relates to what I

teach. If related directly, then it has agreater impact.”






“It has improved my performance

because I get new ideas to use in my

class.”

“If I have a choice in what training I take,

it has a more positive effect on how I

teach my students.”




Interviews:

Corporate Managers

“It’s not being done, right now it’s leftup to the individual to use the skills theyhave learned.”

“Leadership development for one

management style is based on their personal desire.”




Interviews:

Educational Administrators

“All professional development

requirements focus on students’

success of learning.”

“The goal of the district which is

“student achievement”; it’s the overall

process used to determine the link

between learning and

individual/organizational performance.”

2 In what ways have your professional development





training affected your attitude about learning new things?

Emergent Themes Private CorporationsFreq. Percent

Public School DistrictFreq. Percent

Eager to learn 38 20.8 63 19.9

No or little change 30 16.4 39 12.3

More positive outlook 20 10.9 38 12.3

More open minded 19 10.4 30 9.5

Realized more to learn 12 6.6 20 6.3

Learned new strategies 11 6.0 43 13.6






“The non-tech, non-ops training has

had a negative affect on my attitude

about learning new things as trained by

my company, but I still retain a strong interest in learning new things through

self-directed study.”






“It has enhanced my attitude. I understand the importance of

professional development and its

profound impact on my teaching.”

“I enjoy attending training because I

always want to learn about new

strategies that may be better for my students. I always experiment with the

new strategies learned.”




Interviews:

Corporate Managers

“ It’s not evaluated. Managers need to be more proactive in following up with

employees to ensure the training

received is beneficial towards individual

and group growth. Employees are more

in control of the choices they make as

far as training. Management has always

been reactive.”

I i




Interviews:

Corporate Managers

“Goals of the employees’ is how we

evaluate training. The employee set

[their personal goals] that they want toachieve. Training & Development offers

a list of courses and we simply pick

what’s out there.”




Interviews:

Educational Administrators

“Surveys are used. Negative

comments are taken seriously and

look[ed] into to see what could be donedifferently. Because everyone has a say

into the development service they

receive, attitudes are changing in a

positive way. Learning is becoming adistrict wide attitude.”





training enhanced your skills or behaviors?

Emergent Themes Private CorporationFreq. Percent

Public School DistrictFreq. Percent

Learned rudiments of job 42 20.8 65 19.2

No significant change 23 11.4 54 16.0

Increasedproductivity/efficiency

17 8.4 76 22.5

Enhanced leadershipskills

12 5.9 18 5.3

Saw new perspectives 12 5.9 45 13.3






“It gives you a greater appreciation

for those who you work with. I know that

to stay competitive in the job market it isnecessary to continually increase ones

knowledge in all the areas that make the

corporation run.”

S i i ’






“Every now and again I am able toattend a training session that I’ve

selected to meet specific needs and

usually those impact my skills and

behaviors positively.”

“It has enhanced my classroom

management behavior. I learned skills toteach math and science better.”

I i




Interviews:

Corporate Managers

“No one from the training and

development department has ever

contacted our department to see how

best they can serve us. As manager, I’mgiven a budget from my manager; then I

divide the money amongst the

employees. I give more money to those

employees that are on a LeadershipDevelopment Plan.”

I i




Interviews

Corporate Manager

“There’s no training available for

employees who are not interested in

management. Training and Development

offers a list of courses and we simply pick what’s out there. No follow up by

the training and development

department to see how they can enhance

the skills of our employees.”

I t i




Interviews

Educational Administrator

“With the new direction of the professional development servicedepartment, everyone has a say in thetype of development training they need.

Part of the service contract we have withthe professional development department is the evaluation of servicethey provide at different levels.

Constant online surveys are given to seehow the participants’ are using thematerial taught to them and to see what didn’t work and what needs to change.”

P ti i t ’ L i O t




Participants’ Learning Outcomes


Lowden (2003) noted that supervisors should be able to

observe participants utilizing the new knowledge and skills that

they gained as a result of their own professional growth.

Miller (2006) used Guskey’s model in her research and

found that the success of student learning outcomes

came from teachers and mentors coming together on a

regular basis with the primary consultant and discussing

what they needed to do to improve student learning.

G k ’ M d l




Guskey’s Model


Why is evaluation important?Guskey (2000) stated four reasons why evaluation

is important:

(a) Professional development is an ongoing andcontinuous process, not an event;

(b) It is a systematic effort to bring about change;

(c) There is a need for better information to guidereforms; and

(d) There is increased pressure at all levels of

education for greater accountability.





On Evaluation

Both the private sector and public

education organizations have to justify

money being spent on performanceimprovement training of their employees.

(Blanchard & Thacker, 2007; Guskey, 2000;

Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2005; Parry,

1997)





Blanchard and Thacker (2007) stated training managers comeup with many reasons for not evaluating training, some of the reasons are:

There’s nothing to evaluate.

No one really cares about it. (The most commonrationale for not conducting training evaluationsis that formal evaluation procedures are tooexpensive and time consuming)

Evaluation is a threat to my job. (Managers fear the result of an evaluation will show failure of their program which will affect their careers).




XI. Conclusion

Quantitative data collected from theonline PDAT instrument revealed that

public school district employees’ rated

their professional development training

higher than the corporate employees’ in

all critical areas except organizational

support .




Conclusion

It can be concluded that the reason the

public school district in this study faired

better than the private corporation was

due to the use of an evaluation model.




Kandola (2000) stated: “Given theenormous amount of training carried out

each year and, consequently the

enormous amount of money spent on it,

it is surprising to find how little

evaluation is carried out. Or is it?” (p.30)




XII. Recommendations

Organizations must move away from the one shotevaluation process, better known as participants’reactions level. Data obtained through this studyconfirms that participants’ reactions should beconsidered during the planning process but notas a driver for evaluating the overall success of aprogram.

In developing a training program, it is important

to discover the needs of your customers.Implementation is the key for evaluatingparticipants’ learning.




Recommendations

Participants’ learning outcomes must be the

beginning stage of the planning process.

Organizations must develop trainingprograms that are designed with the outcomein mind. Objectives must be clear from thebeginning. Evaluation of how those

objectives must be met should be establishedwith the objectives.




Recommendations

Organizational support is important for implementation of new knowledgeand skills learned. Allowing all participants an active voice in the

planning process will ensure the effectiveness of the program.

Organizations should invest in an evaluation process to account for thedollars being spent on employees.

XIII.Recommendations for Further




Study

(Public Education)

A study should be conducted to explore theprofessional development differences betweeneducational leaders across school districts.

A study should be conducted to explore the

professional development programs amongschool districts; one using an evaluative modeland non-evaluative models.

A statewide study should be conducted in

education using Guskey’s model to determine theoverall effectiveness of state mandatedprofessional development programs.

Recommendations For Further Study




Recommendations For Further Study

(Public Education)

A study should be conducted using a different

evaluation model to see if the results are similar.

A study should be conducted between rural

school districts and urban school districts using

Guskey’s model.

Recommendations for Further Study





(Corporations)

A study should be conducted examining the

correlation between revenue and program

effectiveness.

A study should be conducted to explore the

differences in training and development

programs among Fortune 500 corporations

utilizing personal goals versus corporate goals.






(Corporations)

A study should be conducted to see if corporate employees’ are active participants in

the planning stage of professional development

training verses those that are not active

participants.

A study should be conducted to see if

corporate managers are allowed to observe

participants utilizing the new knowledge andskills learned that they gained as a result of

their own professional growth.



Differences in Professional

Development TrainingBetween One Corporation

and One Large Texas Public

School District

A Dissertation Defense

By

Yolanda E. Smith

Dr. Yolanda E. Smith, PhD Dissertation Defense, Dissertation Chair, Dr. William Allan Kritsonis

Documents