Evaluating the Impact of Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 7 illustrates again the positive attitudes of CPD leaders towards the evaluation of CPD. The vast majority agreed that CPD evaluation is useful, with fewer than 10% finding it a waste of their time. Table 7. Usefulness of evaluating CPD according to CPD leaders (%). Disagree strongly Disagree somewhat Agree somewhat Agree strongly Evaluating CPD is a waste of my time Evaluating CPD is only useful if feedback is given to the provider Evaluating CPD is necessary to see whether it is having a positive effect on pupils Evaluating CPD is necessary to see whether it is having a positive effect on teachers Evaluating CPD is necessary to see whether it is having a positive effect on the school 35.7 57.8 5.9 0.5 6.1 34.4 47.8 11.7 0.5 0.5 50.8 48.1 0.5 0.5 50.8 48.1 0.5 0.5 50.8 48.1 5.2. Evaluation methods In this section we discuss both leaders’ and teachers’ use of evaluation of different outcomes according to our modified version of Guskey’s (2000) hierarchy, and their use of different evaluation tools when doing so. 5.2.a. CPD leaders’ Responses - 47 -
Table 8. Evaluation of different outcomes of CPD according to leaders (%). Never Rarely Sometimes Usually Always Participant satisfaction 0.0 5.1 18.9 40.8 35.2 Participant learning 7.9 17.3 30.9 26.7 17.3 Support from the school 8.3 18.2 37.5 29.7 6.3 Participants’ use of new 6.7 15.4 40.0 31.8 6.2 knowledge and skills Pupil learning outcomes 11.4 14.5 34.7 33.7 5.7 Changes in pupil behaviour 22.9 14.4 38.3 17.6 6.9 Value for money 13.4 15.5 19.6 33.5 18.0 From Table 8 it is clear that evaluation occurred at most of Guskey’s outcome levels, with two thirds of respondents claiming each element was evaluated at least sometimes. The most frequently evaluated component was participant satisfaction, which was always evaluated in over 35% of schools according to CPD leaders, and was usually evaluated in a further 40.8% of schools. Value for money was the second most frequently evaluated element, with over 51% of respondents claiming that this element was evaluated usually or always. Changes in pupil attitude were usually or always evaluated by only 24% of schools, making it the least frequently evaluated aspect. Examination of the rarely or never responses, indicated again that participant satisfaction was the most frequently evaluated outcome, and that changes in pupil behaviour was the least. Interestingly, value for money, which was second most frequently mentioned under always or usually evaluated, was also second most frequently mentioned as being never or rarely evaluated, suggesting that there may be a tendency for schools either to evaluate this element as a matter of course, or not to do so at all. 5.2.a.a Use of evaluation methodologies according to CPD leaders CPD leaders were asked to indicate whether they used particular methods to evaluate each of the seven outcomes in the Guskey model. - 48 -
Page 1 and 2: RESEARCH Evaluating the Impact of C
Page 3 and 4: 1. Executive Summary...............
Page 5 and 6: 1. Executive Summary 1.1. Introduct
Page 7 and 8: The fourth phase of the project was
Page 9 and 10: expertise within the school and dir
Page 11 and 12: The interview phase found some enth
Page 13 and 14: • Schools should be supported in
Page 15 and 16: • The current arrangements for ev
Page 17 and 18: 3. Methodology A mixed method appro
Page 19 and 20: 3.1. Literature review The literatu
Page 21 and 22: school size (pupil roll), and demog
Page 23 and 24: 3.3.a. Interview Phase design proce
Page 25 and 26: 4. Literature review 4.1. Introduct
Page 27 and 28: improvement’ (DfEE, p3) and it of
Page 29 and 30: Figure 2. Evaluating CPD at Three L
Page 31 and 32: Day (1999) (see Figure 3) although
Page 33 and 34: 4.2. Effective Continuing Professio
Page 35 and 36: professional development activities
Page 37 and 38: acquired. Evaluation of this level
Page 39 and 40: data needs to be collected from a v
Page 41 and 42: 5. 5. Questionnaire Findings 3 5.1.
Page 43 and 44: sabbaticals/secondments. Job shadow
Page 45 and 46: projects, school university partner
Page 47: While ratings of CPD leaders and te
Page 51 and 52: Table 12. Methods used to evaluate
Page 53 and 54: CPD leaders also provided more info
Page 55 and 56: “questionnaires were collated and
Page 57 and 58: Finally, some respondents linked ev
Page 59 and 60: 5.2.a.f Conclusions on evaluation m
Page 61 and 62: Table 19. Methods used to evaluate
Page 63 and 64: ‘Following the course on KS3 stra
Page 65 and 66: 2. Discussion Discussion among coll
Page 67 and 68: CPD experience to subsequent though
Page 69 and 70: Evaluation that was spread over tim
Page 71 and 72: ‘All my responses to the first qu
Page 73 and 74: Table 21. Types of CPD do you provi
Page 75 and 76: Table 22. CPD Providers use of eval
Page 77 and 78: Table 24. CPD providers’ views on
Page 79 and 80: Table 26. CPD providers’ views on
Page 81 and 82: 6. Interview Phase Findings The fin
Page 83 and 84: exemplifies the point that there wa
Page 85 and 86: “When I first got the role there
Page 87 and 88: “We have a number of young teache
Page 89 and 90: new teaching strategies or introduc
Page 91 and 92: “Children’s learning - that’s
Page 93 and 94: workers”. If you don’t offer pe
Page 95 and 96: To this end, a number of respondent
Page 97 and 98: value to the work of the school: bu
Page 99 and 100:
Lack of time, however, was highligh
Page 101 and 102:
in with their personal, class/depar
Page 103 and 104:
of chipping away: “Yeah, but what
Page 105 and 106:
Participant Reaction In the intervi
Page 107 and 108:
It is interesting that most respond
Page 109 and 110:
the children’s work reflect that
Page 111 and 112:
One head teacher highlighted the va
Page 113 and 114:
“When you get back to school, so
Page 115 and 116:
7. Route Map Development 7.1. Route
Page 117 and 118:
The Route Map is published here as
Page 119 and 120:
Outcomes of Day Two: The outcomes o
Page 121 and 122:
Use of the materials ranged from in
Page 123 and 124:
7.3.e. Inner Circle Responses There
Page 125 and 126:
The implication of this for schools
Page 127 and 128:
is, through accredited courses, acc
Page 129 and 130:
school outcome, so that evaluation
Page 131 and 132:
School focussed questionnaires duri
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix 2. Respondent and Non Resp
Page 135 and 136:
Appendix 3. Comparison of responden
Page 137 and 138:
Appendix 4. Interview Phase Schools
Page 139 and 140:
Appendix 6. Interview Schedules EVA
Page 141 and 142:
Needs Analysis and Effective CPD Pr
Page 143 and 144:
Head of Department/ Team Leader Rol
Page 145 and 146:
Teacher Provision and Role 1. How w
Page 147 and 148:
CPD Provider Provision and Role 1.
Page 149 and 150:
Appendix 7. Questionnaires CPD Lead
Page 151 and 152:
Section 2: CPD evaluation in practi
Page 153 and 154:
8c. When support from the school fo
Page 155 and 156:
Always Usually Sometimes Rarely Nev
Page 157 and 158:
21. Would you be interested in work
Page 159 and 160:
Teacher Questionnaire EVALUATING TH
Page 161 and 162:
2. When you have participated in CP
Page 163 and 164:
……………………………
Page 165 and 166:
2. Has the effectiveness of CPD act
Page 167 and 168:
13. What is your role within the or
Page 169 and 170:
Preface These materials are intende
Page 171 and 172:
Capacity building in a school must
Page 173 and 174:
Summative evaluation, on the other
Page 175 and 176:
Figure 2: A Range of CPD Activities
Page 177 and 178:
Participant reaction This is the mo
Page 179 and 180:
anch”, or if the usual response t
Page 181 and 182:
Assessment scores are one way of as
Page 183 and 184:
Participant Reaction Immediate eval
Page 185 and 186:
! Consider how current procedures m
Page 187 and 188:
Moving on: Participant Learning Mos
Page 189 and 190:
Organisational support and change I
Page 191 and 192:
Most ticks in the “Enhancing” c
Page 193 and 194:
Moving on: Participant Use of New K
Page 195 and 196:
Pupil learning outcomes Scrutiny of
Page 197 and 198:
Evaluation of the Impact of CPD Eva
Page 199 and 200:
Most ticks in the “Enhancing” c
Page 201 and 202:
superficially very much alike - in
Page 203 and 204:
Appendix 10. Citations Benfield, C.
Page 205 and 206:
Citations for Report Benfield, C. R
Page 207 and 208:
Smith, C. L. (2002). "Using continu
show all

Evaluating the Impact of Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?