Taxonomy refers to the process of classification. We've all heard of Bloom's Taxonomy, which defines six different levels of thinking, from memorization to higher-order critical thinking and creating. Educators often use Bloom's Taxonomy when developing objectives, assignments, and activities for their students. But is there taxonomy for professional development? If not, there should be. Educators apply the term "professional development" to many different types of activities. Some activities merely masquerade under the term, however, while others are more legitimate.

What might a professional development taxonomy look like? Consider this possible construct:

1. Preservice education
2. Courses for recertification
3. Training
4. Information dissemination
5. Presentations
6. Powerful Designs

Let's see where each of these items falls along the professional development continuum.
ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ ﾠﾠﾠ
Preservice education: College and university degree programs for aspiring educators are professional preparation, not professional development. Nevertheless, some in the field of higher education incorrectly apply the term to future educators' courses of study.

Courses for recertification: Many states require educators to accrue a certain number of post-graduate course hours within a given timeframe to retain their certification. States seem to assume that simply completing the courses will enhance the effectiveness of teachers and administrators. This depends, of course, on the motivation and diligence of each educator, the quality and utility of the courses, and whether and how well the educators apply their learning to schools and classrooms. Focus merely on completion of the number of required hours, not whether the learning is applied to the benefit of students, means that this process is professional development only in its most narrow sense.

Training: I wrote extensively about training in a recent post, and it's a term many educators incorrectly use as a synonym for all professional development. Training involves teaching a narrow set of skills to achieve a specific outcome. Just as it is possible to train a dog to sit and roll over, school systems can train educators to conduct CPR, use a whiteboard, or operate a computer. Training requires the participant to learn and demonstrate proficiency in performing discrete tasks. If a person learns to execute sequential concrete steps, the result is more or less guaranteed. Not all aspects of education are so tidy, however, and training is only one type of professional development. School systems sometimes make the mistake of applying training methodologies to initiatives that require more complex learning and more sustained practice. For example, learning to implement a new curriculum requires time, effort, and intellectual engagement combined with practice, reflection, and refinement in actual classroom settings. Typical training cannot successfully address this type of challenge. To succeed, more sophisticated and robust forms of professional development are necessary.

Information dissemination: Schools and districts frequently convene educators for meetings that are allegedly for professional development, but are actually to present information. Conveners might argue that such meetings advance professional development because educators learn new information, but there is no assurance they actually learn it. Even more problematic is the fact that the information often relates to policies, rules, and procedures that have more to do with compliance than with improving educators' performance. It is appropriate and necessary to present such information, but it is not professional development.

Presentations: Didactic presentations are pervasive forms of professional development, particularly in training. In some cases, educators listen to a speaker who reads Power Point slides projected onto a screen. (In an act of charitable redundancy, the speaker may also provide audience members with printed copy of the Power Point.) The problem with presentations is that the intended beneficiaries are largely passive, and often zone out. School systems often seek "good speakers" for professional development days at the beginning of the school year, justifying the expense on the basis that they "motivate" or provide unique expertise, experience, or insight. These speakers usually address large groups of educators, and there is no opportunity for dialogue between the speaker and the audience. Such presentations may be informative and motivating, but school systems make no effort to determine if the effects last beyond a few days. Whatever the context and the purpose, didactic presentations usually have little impact on the performance levels of educators.

Powerful Designs: This is the title of Lois Easton's book that describes more than 20 types of professional development that engage educators' minds as well as their "ears and rears." The book is a very useful resource for identifying professional development that has potential to be more effective than more traditional approaches. Nevertheless, much depends on rigorous and high quality execution of the types of professional development the book describes.

Though this taxonomy may be insufficiently refined for some, perhaps it does suggest a framework that can potentially shape how educators think about, talk about, and use professional development.

Hayes Mizell is NSDC's Distinguished Senior Fellow.