Evaluating mathematics teachers' professional development motivations and needs

Mary C Caddle,Alfredo Bautista,Sheree T Sharpe,Bárbara M Brizuela

doi:10.17583/redimat.2016.2093

Abstract

While there is widespread agreement that one-size-fits-all professional development (PD) initiatives have limited potential to foster teacher learning, much existing PD is still designed without attention to teachers’ motivations and needs. This paper shows that the strengths and weaknesses of middle school mathematics teachers that engage in PD may significantly vary. We present three representative cases that illustrate this diversity. The cases were selected from a cohort of 54 grades 5-9 mathematics teachers in the northeastern United States. The results show that: 1) these three teachers dramatically differed in their motivations and self-perceived needs regarding mathematical content, classroom instruction, and student thinking; 2) their perceptions were closely aligned with the results of our own assessments; and 3) the motivations and needs of these three teachers reflected the general trends identified in the cohort of 54 teachers. We conclude that “giving teachers voice” is essential when designing and implementing PD.

Highlights

While there is widespread agreement that one-size-fits-all professional development (PD) initiatives have limited potential to foster teacher learning, much existing PD is still designed without attention to teachers’ motivations and needs
We address the question of how to consider the widely varying motivations and needs of middle school mathematics teachers as they engage in PD
The goal of this paper is to illustrate the diversity of motivations and needs that middle school mathematics teachers have when engaging in PD programs

Summary

Introduction

While there is widespread agreement that one-size-fits-all professional development (PD) initiatives have limited potential to foster teacher learning, much existing PD is still designed without attention to teachers’ motivations and needs. One common argument put forth to explain these difficulties is that PD might not attend and respond to the actual interests, desires, or demands of the teachers, or, in other words, that PD might not be ‘responsive’ (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995) This idea is consistent with Desimone’s (2009) conceptual framework, according to which being coherent with a teacher’s own motivations and needs is one of the critical features for effective PD (see Bautista, & Ortega-Ruíz, 2015). We analyze what teachers stated as their goals, strengths, and weaknesses when they enrolled in our three-semester PD program, and how teachers’ statements compare to our assessment of their knowledge of mathematics content and student thinking. We claim that it is essential to systematically assess if teachers’ existing strengths and weaknesses are complemented by what PD can offer, and otherwise, consider how to vary offerings to meet their needs

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion