When I began teaching several years ago someone in our District’s “Welcome New Teachers Week” made the mistake of telling us that teachers are no longer respected, trusted, and that “government” thinks that all of the problems in education are the fault of the teachers, which is partially true. The California Department of Education, in keeping with the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and the Reading First sub-component has focused on training teachers – from newcomers to seasoned people who have been through numerous iterations of emphasis, whole word vs. phonics, “New Math” vs. manipulative-driven math, etc. Teacher Development is very important when a new system is introduced and these new systems.
In Chapter 2 of our course text, applying it broadly, to education, one strategy or “training and development” initiative is “Align Training and Development with the Company’s Strategic direction. The Best Practices of the No Child Left Behind Act” are “forces” that influences teacher training to “ensure that training and development programs support the company’s (the government’s) strategic needs. Researchers have developed these universal strategies to attempt to increase the uniform quality of education in America, This is a trend that I feel is permanent. (Noe, R. A., Employee Training and Development, 2010, page 63) Teacher Professional Development will continue as there is more feedback, more research, and more strategies developed by state and federal government indicate an ongoing need. In my experience, however, I found that only through research associated with this Walden MS degree that Teacher Training was mandated through the NCLB. I find it heartening to know that the government sought to teach the new tactics to everyone, new or old. (www.edweek.org/ew/issues/no-child-left-behind)
The second is a method of teacher training that is more specific and more threatening – Principals are asked to do more classroom visits. However, in Chapter 1 of our text it mentions that employee engagement is an important factor in training and development. (Noe, R. A., Employee Training and Development, 2010, pages 16 and 17) This trend, although deemed necessary, does not give the employee a sense of well-being, and that he or she is trusted by the employer. It is good for the “system” because it gives the principals a clearer focus on what training the teachers need, but the emotional toll on the employees is very great. This trend is also “here to stay.”
The third trend, that of training through the “faculty model,” is also the one that I feel will be more and more prevalent in the future. (Noe, R. A., Employee Training and Development, 2010, page 80) Through courses such as this many schools have experts in technology (for instance – “Smart Boards”) that are used through Teacher Professional Development to train and provide updated reinforcement instruction. My former school had teachers with Master’s in Instructional Design and Technology train their colleagues on a regular basis. These Subject Matter Experts, using a phrase from our textbook, train according to their specific knowledge and availability. Not all teachers are experts in all forms of new classroom technology and not all training is accomplished in a manner that is timely for everyone because of the constraints of conflicting prep-periods, different “tracks” or the occasional unavailability of the Teacher-instructors. Therefore new teachers are frequently left to, as Dr. Stolovich mentioned in the video “The Truth About Training,” are most often introduced to technology through On the Job Training and someone else giving them guidance – which at times, as Dr. Stolovich reminded us, causes the trainee to “Also acquire the bad habits and misunderstandings of the informal trainer.” (Laureate Universities Media Program, 2010 “The Truth About Training.”
References:
Noe, R. A. (2010). Employee training and development (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Lauareate Universities Media presentation, 2010, “The Truth About Training”
