RE: Staff Development Days

Along with Renee, I laud recommendation 6.1 that gives ten days to low-performing schools.  In Los Angeles, we have been given sixteen sessions of one hundred fifty minutes over the year for professional development sessions.  Although my school works hard to do lesson study-type collaboration and analysis among curricular teams, the time is after a rushed day of instruction. Even our best teams just get rolling in reflective conversation and real analysis of instruction when it's 4:00.  Many of our teachers have young families or are taking classes after school-- not to mention keeping up with their classes-- so more time added at the end of the school day would be futile.

Whole days have been better use of time in my experience.  Time on those days can incorporate more elements for good professional development.  For example, if our Day 1 data analysis indicates to all that we need more help in helping students access textbooks that are difficult for them to read, then the beginning of Day 2 could be some strategies that help students access text; good models exist in core content areas now.

This model implies the ten days are spread out over the year to allow for ongoing analysis of student results, that a team of folks are meeting regularly to analyze the results of each previous day in order to intelligently plan for the next one, and that all of this is being led by a principal that respects and encourages a collaborative culture. 

Other time models are possible, such as frontloading a school year with three or four days to learn new techniques that the school's teachers know they need to learn, follow-up days throughout the year, and another day or two session at the end to plan for the next year.  There are many, and each school should be allowed to come up with its own depending on its needs. Should it need advice, the Briefing Book provided here is an excellent beginning.