NCLB: Survey Finds Many Educators Experience Little Positive NCLB Impact on Professional Development

News Release: Feb. 18, 2004

For additional information, contact:
Hayes Mizell
NCLB Task Force
National Staff Development Council
803-787-0760
hmizell@msn.com

Forty-seven percent of more than 2,000 educators responding to an online survey of the No Child Left Behind Act's impact on professional development believe the law is "having no discernable effect." Only 14% believe NCLB-funded professional development is "improving the quality of teaching."

The survey was conducted between December 2003 and February 2004 by the NCLB Task Force of the National Staff Development Council. Respondents were from all regions of the United States, with 78% working in urban, suburban, and rural schools. Sixty-three percent of the educators were teachers. The survey asked educators to respond based on their knowledge of school systems and schools they "know best."

Hayes Mizell, NSDC's Distinguished Senior Fellow who also coordinates the Council's NCLB Task Force, believes the survey results indicate a need for more attention to implementation of the law's professional development provisions. "Given the NCLB challenges educators are facing, high-quality professional development is essential, but it does not appear that most school systems are effectively using the law towards that end. Though the NCLB's requirements and funding for staff development should be improving educators' levels of performance, it appears too many teachers still experience professional learning as an onerous obligation rather than a useful and uplifting resource," Mizell said.

When questioned about reasons "school systems I know best are choosing to apply for and use NCLB Title II funds," 40% of the educators chose the response, "to provide professional development they could not provide otherwise because of cutbacks in the state or local education budget." Thirty-four percent said school systems apply for the funds "to strengthen the quality of professional development" and 23% cited school systems' interests in increasing "the quantity of professional development (more time or more participants)." However, 75% of the respondents acknowledged that they have not read their own or another school system's application for Title II funding.

Title II requires school systems to involve "teachers, paraprofessionals, principals, other relevant school personnel, and parents" in preparing Title II applications and planning professional development activities, but the results are mixed. Thirty-five percent of respondents indicated this involvement has occurred, but 27% said it was not, and 33% of the educators replied that they had not even heard of this Title II requirement.

While the NCLB definition of professional development discourages "1-day or short-term workshops or conferences," 34% of the respondents indicated such activities "are about the same frequency as two years ago," 11% said there are more such activities, and another 34% said the survey question "is the first time I have heard of this NCLB provision." On the other hand, 22% of the educators said there are "significantly fewer" one-day or short-term workshops or conferences than two years ago.

Half of the educators reported that school systems or schools are providing "about the same amount of professional development as in 2002" while 30% said there is "significantly more" or "somewhat more" professional development as a result of the NCLB.

The NCLB definition of professional development also calls for activities to be "regularly evaluated for their impact on increased teacher effectiveness and improved student academic achievement." However, 33% of educators responding to the survey believe there is about the same amount of evaluation as before NCLB and another 20 percent responded that "school systems I know have not and do not evaluate p.d. to determine its effect on teacher effectiveness and student achievement." Twenty-four percent responded more positively. They believe NCLB has sparked "more evaluation" of professional development.

In response to a question about the major effects "to date" of NCLB in the educators' work settings, a total of 57% believe the law is having a negative impact. Forty percent said people are "experiencing implementation pressures that are negatively impacting their morale and/or performance." Ten percent believe one effect of the law is that people are "diverting their attention from more important issues that can improve teaching and learning," and another 7% are "leaving or thinking about leaving education as a career."

But a total of 27% believe the law is having a more positive impact. Eighteen percent said that educators are "beginning to think, talk, and/or act in new ways that may ultimately result in more students performing at higher levels," and nine percent believe educators are "complying with the law." Eleven percent replied that educators are "carrying on their work much as they did before NCLB."

The survey also provided respondents an opportunity to provide additional information concerning their personal experiences with how the NCLB is impacting professional development. One-third of the educators took advantage of this opportunity, with many choosing to provide extensive commentary. Their responses included a wide range of opinions, including:

• "I feel that a one day in-service every other week is not making me an effective teacher...I think that the increased focus on in-service is burning new teachers out because so much information is repetitive and we've heard it all before ten times in teacher education."

• "Professional development is great as long as it is not forced on you along with all the other things we need to do as teachers.... Even with all this professional development stuff, [it] doesn't mean the students are going to learn UNLESS THEY WANT TO!..Maybe the parents could use professional development along with us."

• "I believe that our PD is of better quality and more directly involved with our teaching. We are making better choices about what we want our PD to be so that it is worth the time and effort to attend PD. We are not wasting time on PD that is just a fulfillment of hours required and the PD is spread over a period of time so that we can learn and use before we learn more."

• "What professional development my district is offering is for a limited number of teachers per building with the expectation that we teach the rest of our staff. It is difficult to feel proficient at this task when [I am] just a learner myself."

• "I believe that our district may be facing an issue in the future regarding Title II funds. Class size is always an issue and decisions between use of Title II funds for PD or for class size may be an area where there will be disagreement."

• "Although it's certainly nice to have some funding for professional development, this business of not trusting educators to decide what they need the most to improve their teaching and the students' learning is totally ridiculous."

• "There has been no information at all given to teachers regarding professional development opportunities. In fact, there are significantly less courses etc. being offered today than ever before."

• "The quality of professional development is the issue. Teachers need to leave a workshop with useful tools and information that can be implemented in the classroom immediately. So much time and energy is wasted on the wrong thing."

• "I have not seen or heard of the professional development side of NCLB. At our school we have only heard how the NCLB has lowered our rating as a school and how negative it is."

• "The kind of professional development occurring in my district under NCLB has taken the 'professional' aspect out of the program that existed at my school. It has become a top down program where teachers are told what to do and not allowed to question or voice concerns about the research or instructional strategies being mandated by the law."

• "We had already been doing PD as this law is requiring before the law was created. It does work well!!"

• "My school system has traditionally minimized opportunities for staff development choosing in-house peer gathering and training. Last school year and this year to date there have been several opportunities for staff development off-site and at quality conferences. I, personally, have been significantly affected and rejuvenated. In fact, I am teaching better than I have for the last decade."

• "Rather than directing funds at professional development - the money might be better spent in reducing class size or giving stipends to teachers to take coursework that would be in-depth enough to do some good."

• "My state eliminated any funding for PD this year, making federal monies for this purpose more valuable than ever."

• "Most of our districts comply with the state regulation to provide staff in-services; this is usually release time so that districts still get funded or students that day. This in-service time has not had, in the past, anything to do with improving instruction to improve achievement.... In-service time has been to do quarter grades, plan homecoming, schedules, etc."

• "The problem I see at this point is that important PD that is research-based and would lead to increased student learning is not being pursued because districts feel that must engage in activities that align directly with assessment associated with NCLB that will bring about change in a more predictable way. There appears to be no willingness to take risks because there is too much at stake."

• "Because the scientific research promoted by NCLB is so narrowly defined, most teachers are going through the motion of following the propaganda they receive from the NCLB professional development trainings. I know of no teacher worth her salt who pays any attention to NCLB's approach to professional development because we feel it is totally biased and is one more nail in the coffin to end public education as we know it."

• "The professional development I have received is scripted, boring, poorly delivered, expensive and meaningless. We are laying off teachers, paras, canceling field trips and rationing paper. Yet paying for substitute teachers, and trainers to tell us less than we already know."

• "Our professional development experiences seem to be generic in nature and definitely lacking in school-wide commitment and follow-through."

• "Teachers and paraprofessionals are now looking at professional development in a more critical manner. They are beginning to understand that professional development needs to tie directly to improve student achievement, it needs to be on-going, and whenever possible, research-based."

• "The requirement of scientifically based research is substantially decreasing the quality of language arts professional development."

• "NCLB is causing more scientifically based research to reach teachers. Knowing why things done a certain way get better results is bound to impact the teaching in the classroom."

• "I do a lot of staff development, and we're much more conscious of jumping through the assigned hoops now; I'm just not at all convinced those are the right hoops! 'The pig don't get fatter by weighing it...'."

"We don't know how informed all the respondents are about the NCLB and its provisions," Mizell said, "and this certainly was not a 'scientific' survey, but the results suggest that a great deal of work remains to be done for the law's professional development provisions to foster the teacher quality necessary for all students to perform proficiently by 2014."