The Role of Technology in Teachers - Professional Development

The University of Southern Mississippi
The Aquila Digital Community
Dissertations
Summer 8-2007
THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL

DEVELOPMENT
Nisrine Nabih Adada Shatila
University of Southern Mississippi
Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations
Part of the Educational Methods Commons, Online and Distance Education Commons, and the
Teacher Education and Professional Development Commons
Recommended Citation
Adada Shatila, Nisrine Nabih, "THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT" (2007). Dissertations. 1259.
https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/1259
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by The Aquila Digital Community. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of The Aquila Digital Community. For more
information, please contact aquilastaff@usm.edu.
DEVELOPMENT
by
Nisrine Nabih Adada
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Studies Office
of The University of Southern Mississippi
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Approved:
August 2007
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
COPYRIGHT BY
NISRINE NABIH ADADA
2007
DEVELOPMENT
by
Nisrine Nabih Adada
Abstract of a Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Studies Office
of The University of Southern Mississippi
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
August 2007
ABSTRACT
DEVELOPMENT
by Nisrine Nabih Adada
August 2007
Professional staff development is a learning process that teachers go
through on a yearly basis. The literature confirms that high-quality professional
development has a positive effect on teacher and student performances. Living in
today’s rapidly changing world, teachers have come to the realization that
technology is a vital part of their students’ lives. The literature also supports
teachers’ increasing need for online professional training. The purpose of this
research study was to determine K-12 teachers’ attitudes toward traditional face-
to-face professional development and online professional development. The
study also investigated teachers’ perceived level of support in face-to-face and
online professional training. Furthermore, the study examined teachers’ attitudes
toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classes before and
after they participated in online professional development. The researcher
surveyed 1,000 K-12 teachers in nine Mississippi public school districts using a
questionnaire; quantitative and qualitative information was gathered. The
quantitative data revealed a significant difference between teachers’ attitudes
toward face-to-face and online professional development; teachers had more
ii
positive attitudes toward face-to-face professional training. Further, the
quantitative data related to teachers’ perceived level of support in online and
face-to-face professional development revealed significant difference. The results
of this study showed that teachers received more support in face-to-face
professional development than they did in online professional development.
Moreover, the quantitative data related to teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing
technology as an instructional tool in their classes revealed significant difference.
Teachers integrated more technology into their instruction after they participated
in online professional training. Furthermore, the results of this study indicated
that the majority of teachers reported their willingness to participate in more
online professional development programs. The qualitative data suggested that
teachers liked how interactive and convenient online professional training was.
Moreover, the qualitative data indicated that ample teacher-involvement and
teacher-support were needed for online professional development to be more
effective.
iii
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my beloved husband, Ahmad,
who has been there for me every step of the way and to my precious children,
AbdulRahman and Majida, who endured so much, yet were very patient.
I would also like to dedicate this study to my dearest parents, Mr. Nabih
Adada and Mrs. Maha Adada, who instilled in me the value of education and
taught me never to give up. Thank you, Mother and Father for believing in me.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to my committee chair, Dr.
Ronald Styron, for all the guidance and support he has provided. I would also like
to express my appreciation to my statistician, Dr. Kyna Shelley, for her expertise
and patience. Special thanks to the rest of my committee members, Dr. Gaylynn
Parker, Dr. Mike Ward, and Dr. David Lee, for all the help they have given me. I
would also like to thank all the superintendents and principals who gave me
permission to collect data from their schools. A word of thanks also goes to all
teachers who gave few minutes of their valuable time to fill out my
questionnaires. I am extremely grateful to all my family members and friends who
encouraged and supported me throughout this endeavor.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT................................................................................................................ ii
DEDICATION........................................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................................................ v
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................viii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.......................................................................................ix
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................. 1
Statement of the Problem

Research Questions
Definition of Terms
Assumptions
Delimitations
Limitations
Justification
Purpose of the Study
Summary
II. REVIEW OF PERTINENT LITERAURE...........................................15
Introduction
Theoretical Framework
Professional Staff Development
Online Professional Development
The Role of Educational Leaders in Providing Staff Development
Programs
Summary
III. METHODOLOGY.............................................................................. 62
Research Overview
Sample
Instrumentation
Procedures
Data Analysis
IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA 68
Introduction
Data Collection
Description of Sample
Data Preparation
Analysis of Research Questions
Summary of Findings
Ancillary Findings
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 92
Introduction
Summary of Procedures
Limitations
Summary of Major Findings
Discussion
Qualitative Findings and Discussion
Ancillary Findings and Discussion
Recommendations for Policy and Practice
Implications for the Educational Leader
Recommendations for Future Research
Reflections
APPENDIXES......................................................................................................111
REFERENCES..................................................................................................... 136
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
1. Demographic Characteristics of Sam ple..................................................... 71
2. Factor Loadings............................................................................................. 74
3. Summary of the Cronbach Alpha Statistics of theSix Factors...................76
4. Summary of Means and Standard Deviations for the ThreeResearch
Q uestions..................................................................................................... 83
viii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure
1. Teacher Participation in Online Professional Development.......................72
2. Teachers’ Preference for Professional Development.................................77
3. Teachers’ Willingness to Participate in More Online Professional
Development.................................................................................................78
4. Teachers’ Satisfaction with Their Districts’ Professional Development and
Online Professional Development Programs............................................. 87
5. Teacher Involvement in the Planning of Professional Development......... 88
6. How Much Choice Teachers Have in the Professional Development They
Receive......................................................................................................... 89
7. Impact of Professional Development on Student Achievement.................90
8. The Value of Technology Integration into Instruction................................. 91
ix
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The first chapter of this study introduces the topic to be examined. It
presents a glimpse of the related literature. Moreover, it states the problem to be
studied as well as the research questions. Definitions of some terms used in the
research study and the assumptions the researcher had are also reported. The
delimitation and limitations related to this specific study are listed followed by
justifications and the purpose behind the study.
“Professional development is a growth-promoting learning process that
empowers stakeholders (teachers, administrators, staff, and other school
personnel) to improve the educational organization” (MDE, 1998). A variety of
school systems around the world suffer from the lack of professional
development causing serious problems. “Consensus is growing among school
reformers that teachers are the most important school-related determinant of
student achievement” (Berry, Hoke, & Hirsch, 2004, p. 2). Oelrich (2001)
confirmed that according to The National Staff Development Council (NSDC), in
order for students to grow intellectually, teachers should continually learn.
Teachers in the United States should have access to innovative, ongoing
learning opportunities so that they can offer their students high-quality education.
Teachers, even if highly-educated and well-experienced, need to always
be updated with new information. Mississippi Department of Education (MDE,
2003) requires K-12 teachers to have at least five Continuing Education Unit
(CEU) credits in a five-year interval for licensure renewal purposes. Educators
2
have to be given the chance to keep learning so that they continue to grow.
“Teachers need ongoing, high-quality professional development that offers
relevant, evidence-based materials for improving teaching, learning, and student
outcomes” (Adsit, 2004, p. 4). Unfortunately, research illustrates that most staff
development training is still done in secluded workshops and is not related to the
reality of classroom practice (Gross, Truesdale, & Bielec, 2001).
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) calls for each child to be taught by a
qualified teacher; the NSDC added to this requirement that all teachers should
receive high-quality professional development by the year 2007 (Salpeter, 2003).
When educators persist on expanding their horizons they are paving roads of
success not only for themselves, but also for their students. Through diverse
professional development programs, teachers communicate and share
experiences with other learned intellectuals. Such programs enable teachers to
expand their knowledge base. This has a direct positive effect on teachers’ and
students’ performance. Teacher education and professional staff development
improve student achievement (Darling-Hammond, 1997). Teacher quality is one
of the basic determinants of the advancement in student achievement (Hirsh,
Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005). For schools to change, teachers need to
change their practices. The role of professional development is to assure teacher
quality. Professional development, therefore, should be a fundamental element of
every school system.
For a professional development program to succeed, it should be carefully
chosen. Educational leaders have to consider the needs of students as well as
3
teachers before they start planning. They also have to be very supportive and
understanding. According to Clement and Vandenberghe (2001), there is
consensus among educators worldwide that in order for teachers to develop
professionally, they should be supported and encouraged. Teachers, on the
other hand, have to be open-minded and ready for change. Joint planning,
collaborative implementation, and cooperative assessment are key factors for a
professional development program to be successful (Goodlad, 1994). Members
of a school community have to work hand in hand for professional development
to occur. Hawley and Valli (1999) noted that professional development should be
ongoing, on-site, derived from practice, focused on enhancing student
performance, based on teacher collaboration, and directly related to teachers’
needs.
Educational leaders involve teachers and staff members in professional
development programs to improve their performance. Professional development
can be done through lectures, workshops, conferences, mentoring programs,
online courses, or regular graduate courses. Professional development programs
allow teachers to share experiences. They help educators learn from each
others’ success and failure. Furthermore, they allow teachers to update their
information on the subjects they teach.
Teachers feel very uncomfortable when their students know more about
the topic being taught than they do. Living in a high-tech world, students need
their teachers to be able to live up to the challenge. The only way for them to do
so is via quality professional development. Educational leaders have to be
4
cognizant of the reality that students as well as a number of K-12 teachers are
considered Digital Natives. They are individuals who rely primary on their visual
sense to collect data (Weiler, 2004). According to Oblinger (2003), people who
belong to the Digital Generation learn best when technology is utilized in their
learning environment; they also prefer team work to individual work. Moreover,
Weiler noted that Digital Natives favor hands-on experiences that have a
meaningful connection to their needs. Identifying the K-12 teachers who belong
to the Digital Generation and knowing their specific needs, educational leaders
will plan effective, meaningful professional development training.
Online professional development is one of the most useful processes
through which teachers can keep up with the rapidly growing world of technology.
The Internet is the fastest means for teachers to learn new instructional tactics
(Golden, 2004) and share them with other educational experts all around the
world. However, Hokanson and Hooper (2004) affirmed that computer
technology has not been effectively implemented in classrooms. Staff members,
teachers and administrators can participate in numerous professional
experiences via the Internet. By offering online learning to K-12 teachers,
“schools are not bound by the limits of time and substitutes” (Anderson, 2000, p.
27). Educators can download lesson plans, curricular activities, and instructional
strategies from educational websites anytime. Moreover, they can have access
to Internet libraries that are packed with educational resources. Teachers can
also register for online courses that can help them learn more about what they
teach and how they teach it. Ongoing professional development and abundant
5
access to computers and the Internet will lead to effective use if teachers are
properly trained and well encouraged (Ertmer et al., 2002). Computer integration
is more than just hardware access. “It’s not just about computers, it’s about
education” (Hokanson & Hooper, 2004, p. 251).
The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2004) referred to the significance
of technology integration in education in its policymaker’s guide. It emphasized
that integrating 21st century skills into curriculum and instruction will make
learning germane to students who already lead stimulating, digital lives outside of
school. Students who use technological devices and gadgets extensively in their
daily lives need the same advanced technologies to be incorporated into their
learning (Louie & Hargrave, 2006).
Anderson (2000) affirmed that educational leaders should take full
advantage of the Internet. They should use it as a vehicle for delivering quality
professional development. Technology-based staff development tied to the
proper kind of support and guidance results in teachers’ growth.
This research study investigated the rewards and drawbacks of online
professional development in comparison to traditional face-to-face staff
development from the vantage points of K-12 teachers.
Statement of the Problem
“Successful professional development programs strengthen the
effectiveness of the educational organization, lead to improved student learning
and performance, and promote professional growth for all employees” (MDE,
1998). Without quality professional development training, the school system as a
6
whole suffers tremendously (Barth, 2001). Educators need to expand their
horizons. They need professional staff development to improve their performance
in the classroom. Teachers should be given the opportunity to update their
instructional methods. They need to be familiarized with the latest techniques
that other teachers are using worldwide. Professional development gives
educators the chance to ameliorate their instruction (Bryan, 2000). When their
instruction is enriched with the latest information and techniques, their students’
achievement greatly improves. The lack of effective professional development
processes may mean boring, even chaotic classes. Students tend to get bored
easily if their teachers do not vary their techniques. This boredom usually causes
the students to misbehave, which eventually leads to turmoil in the classroom.
Online professional development programs are in high demand among
educators nationwide. Wang (2000) affirmed that educators in this day and age
are conscious to the bare fact that technology is here to stay, so more teachers
are yearning for online professional training. However, technology integration is
still considered to be “an option” in many schools. The data collected from The
Mississippi Online Technology Evaluation (MOTE) study held by the MDE in
2002 to evaluate where technology stands in Mississippi public schools indicated
that “the percentage of teachers that facilitate the integration of technology
across the curriculum is 54%” (MDE, 2004, p. 3). Data from the MOTE study also
showed that very few teachers (only 1%) made use of the online professional
learning they had received (MDE, 2004).
7
The Public Broadcasting Services (PBS) TeacherLine is an educational
resource that provides K-12 teachers and principals with a variety of online
professional development opportunities. Some of these online learning programs
are directly related to specific contents, yet others deal with technology
integration, methodology, classroom management, and the like. PBS
TeacherLine offers Continuing Education Units (CEU) as well as facilitators who
guide and support participating teachers and administrators throughout the whole
process.
If teachers believe online professional development is more beneficial
than traditional staff development, then educational leaders have to ensure that
their teachers are getting the training they value. Teachers have to be involved in
professional staff development that “makes sense to them.” The way teachers
view professional development affects their performances. If they believe that the
professional development conferences they are attending are dull, boring, and
ineffective, they will neither enjoy them nor benefit from them. However, if
teachers are given the chance to participate in professional development
programs that are intriguing, beneficial, and effective, they will not only be
pleased, but also prosper (Bryan, 2000). Teachers who strive to help their
students grow intellectually, cognitively, and emotionally, call for high-quality
professional development programs that help them keep up with our
expeditiously changing world.
8
Research Questions
The following research questions were set to determine educators’
attitudes toward online professional development and traditional face-to-face
professional development.
1. Is there a statistically significant difference between K-12 teachers’
attitudes toward online professional development and their attitudes
toward traditional face-to-face professional development?
perceived level of support in online professional development and their
perceived level of support in traditional face-to-face professional
development?
attitudes toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their
classrooms before and their attitudes after participating in online
professional training?
Definition of Terms
Andraaoav: Knowles’ learning theory that proposed adults learning has to
be experience-based.
Asynchronous Courses: Online courses that are available 24 hours a day
(Killion, 2000).
CEU (Continuing Education Unit) Credit: Teachers ought to receive CEU
credits in order to keep their certification. In Mississippi, holders of Bachelor’s
and Master’s degrees are required to have at least 5 CEUs in a five-year cycle.
9
In general- every five training hours equal to one half of a CEU credit. (MDE,
2003).
Digital Natives: People who view technology as part of their natural
environment. They are born after 1980 (Oblinger, 2003).
Drive: In Hull’s Drive Reduction Theory, drive refers to the adults’ desire to
learn.
EETT: Enhancing Education through Technology federal grant. State
education departments give this grant to schools to get technological tools
Internet access, and online professional development.
Facilitator: Person who guides and supports teachers throughout the
professional development program.
Intranet: A network that resembles the World Wide Web, but people who
work in a specific organization are the only ones who have access to it.
Liaison: Contact person.
Learning Community: A group of people who work collaboratively. They
use their team power and expertise to help each other learn and achieve their
common objectives.
MDE: Mississippi Department of Education.
Ml: Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Theory.
NCLB Act: The No Child Left Behind Act that mandates that all children
should be performing at grade level by 2013.
NPEAT: The National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in
Teaching is an association of 29 organizations. These national organizations
10
participate in research-based studies to improve the performance of teachers
and students.
NSDC: The National Staff Development Council.
Online Learning: Learning that is done via the Internet.
OPDA: Online Professional Development Activity.
PDA: Professional Development Activity.
Synchronous Courses: Online courses that require learners to be online at
the same time (Killion, 2000).
Technology-Mediated Professional Development (TMPD): Training that is
done through the use of media including: videos, televisions, cameras, tapes,
and computers (Adsit, 2004).
Virtual University: A university that offers degrees that are fully online.
World Wide Web (WWW!: The worldwide network of web pages-
electronic documents that include text, illustrations, audio, and video.
Assumptions
The following assumptions were set by the researcher:
■ All educators who responded to the survey had participated in at least
one professional development program.
■ Everyone who answered the survey instrument did so honestly and
without duress.
■ Everyone who filled out the questionnaire read the instructions carefully
and followed them specifically.
11
Delimitations
The researcher expected the following to be delimitations of this particular
research study:
■ The researcher mailed the survey instruments to superintendents who
submitted them to principals. One of the limitations was that the survey
instruments might have not been distributed in a timely manner. The ideal
case would have been for the researcher to mail the questionnaires to
individual teachers. Due to geographical, monetary, and time issues that
was implausible.
■ A large number of targeted teachers might have had no experience in
online professional training which might have affected the results and
findings.
Limitations
The following facts limited the research study:
■ The sample included educators from only one southeastern state-
Mississippi.
■ Only K-12 educators who teach in The Mississippi Public School System
were targeted. The sample did not include private school teachers.
* The researcher was not capable of determining the perceptions of
teachers who had never participated in professional development training.
Justification
This research study is of potentially great value for educators especially
ones who work in or are associated with K-12 schools in Mississippi. The findings
12
of this study can help educational leaders better plan professional development
of K-12 teachers. This research allows principals, superintendents, and
professional development coordinators to see the presumed value of online
professional development programs from the perspectives of the teachers. The
study tested whether K-12 teachers view online professional development as an
essential rather than optional ingredient of their professional lives. Technology is
an instrument educational leaders need to use to help teachers receive ongoing,
collaborative professional development training (Salpeter, 2003). When teachers
are given the chance to participate in online professional development programs
in addition to regular staff development training, they will be engaged in rich,
interactive experiences that not only enlarge their knowledge base, but also
inform them of different ways in which they can better their performances in class
(Anderson, 2000). This study also investigated the difference in K-12 teachers’
perceived level of support for traditional professional development as opposed to
online professional development.
Another purpose of this study was to investigate how educators who were
exposed to technology-based professional development training felt about
integrating technology into their instruction. Educational leaders need to know
whether an increase in teachers’ participation in technology-oriented professional
training, amplifies technology incorporation into classroom instruction.
“Offering only face-to-face models of staff development or only offering
online models of staff development will hinder the learning process of the
teachers involved” (Cole & Styron, 2006, p. 33). This study was not intended to
13
explore whether online professional development should replace other kinds of
professional development techniques, but rather to examine the potential value
and power of online training in the professional development of educators. This
research study was conducted to determine whether online professional
development should complement other staff development strategies incorporated
in K-12 schools.
Purpose of Study
Professional development is an integral part of almost every educational
institution in every state. More schools worldwide are implementing online
professional development programs to train their teachers and administrators. As
leaders of professional development, educational leaders have come to the
realization that technology is here to stay (Wilcox, Bauschard, & Osterhus, 1998).
The purpose of this research was to study Mississippi school teachers’ attitudes
toward professional development. The researcher was interested in knowing if
Mississippi K-12 teachers find online professional development more useful and
beneficial than traditional face-to-face professional development. The researcher
was also interested in investigating if there was a difference in the perceived
level of support K-12 teachers received in online professional development
versus face-to-face professional development.
The researcher also studied these teachers’ attitudes toward incorporating
technology into their instruction. The study was designed to explore whether
teachers who believed that learning could actually occur in an interactive,
engaging way, would then be encouraged to have their students gain knowledge
14
in the same way. The study was set to determine if K-12 teachers integrated
more technology into their classes after they participated in online professional
development. It was also set to determine if Mississippi teachers were more
comfortable assigning technology-based tasks to their students after they took
online professional training. Moreover, the researcher was interested in finding
out what valuable professional development was according to K-12 teachers to
help determine if online training was more effective than traditional training.
Summary
The first chapter of this research study talked about the need for high-
qualified teachers and the value of both traditional and online professional
development. It also stated the problem and the research questions this specific
research study investigated. Definitions of some terms were also presented
followed by the assumptions the researcher made. This chapter also included the
delimitations and limitations of the study. Justifications of the research study
followed by the purpose were also discussed.
15
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF PERTINENT LITERATURE
Introduction
An extensive amount of literature has been written on professional
development and teacher learning in the past decade (Borko, 2004; Richardson
& Placier, 2001). The literature on teacher quality is saturated with research that
supports the fact that teachers need to know their subject matter and how to
teach it. Recent studies show that professional support and redesigning schools
are important factors for effective teaching (Berry, Hoke, & Hirsch, 2004). Haar
(2001) stated that ongoing, high-quality professional development guides,
encourages, and strengthens educators. However, only a tiny portion of what is
known about high quality professional development is employed in schools
(Sparks, 2002).
According to the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE, 1998):
Educators must have time, resources, and opportunities to assess their own
teaching methods, to develop and learn new subject matter, to work together
as professionals, to develop and implement school improvement plans, and to
stay abreast of current research in their fields of study. Professional
development is essential to school improvement and must be seen as an
investment in life-long learning for all educators.
Moreover, The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act mandates that all
teachers of core academic subjects should be highly qualified by the academic
year 2005-2006. The law requires state departments of education to give
evidence of what they are doing to improve teacher quality. Another objective of
NCLB is that all students become technologically literate by the end of their
eighth grade.
“In 1996 the State Board of Education approved a new professional
development model which supports educators in meeting the ever-changing
needs of students as they prepare for the challenges of a technologically
advanced society” (MDE, 1998). Richard W. Riley- Secretary of Education- once
said, “Computers are the ‘new basic’ of American education, and the Internet is
the blackboard of the future.” Online professional training helps teachers educate
today’s youth in a way that prepares them for tomorrow’s high-tech world.
According to Killion, online professional learning has the potential to enrich
educators’ experiences. Yet, “all the bells and whistles made possible with
technology will not produce results for students or educators unless the
technology supports high-quality learning for educators” (Killion, 2002, p. 6).
Theoretical Framework
Various research studies confirm the vital need for teachers to participate
in “meaningful, effective” professional development training. Knowles’ theory of
andragogy proposed that experience should be the origin of the learning
activities of adults. Adults want to learn concepts and issues that are directly
related to their careers or daily lives in an experience-rich setting. Moreover, their
learning has to be problem-oriented rather than content-driven. Adults learn best,
according to Knowles (1980), when they are given the opportunity to experiment,
not when they are lectured to. This is directly proportionate to the way teachers
17
need to be trained. Online professional training gives teachers the opportunity to
not only learn through experimentation, but also deal with actual problem-based
situations as opposed to hypothetical concepts. It also gives them a chance to
enhance their knowledge in fields that are directly connected to their profession.
Hull et al. (1940) argued that drive is a critical element for learning to
occur. Individuals, according to the Drive Reduction Theory, do not gain
knowledge unless they have a desire to learn. Hull et al. also proposed that the
learner has to be attentive. If a teacher just “attends” a staff development lecture
or conference that does not guarantee learning. Furthermore, the learner should
respond to the amount of knowledge provided; being active is crucial. Finally,
Hull et al. suggested that the learning must satisfy the learner’s wants. Online
training programs are interactive; they allow teachers to be active learners.
Educators who participate in online professional training are not only attentive,
but also willing to learn.
Professional Staff Development
Exceptional teachers are the foundations of excellent schools; therefore,
improving teachers’ skills and knowledge should be one of the most prominent
investments school leaders make (Holland, 2005). Haar emphasized that quality,
ongoing professional development is a must for any school system to succeed. If
teachers stop growing, their students cease to grow, too. Teachers’ knowledge
and skill is what influences student leaning and achievement. Caring, qualified
teachers are needed for every student to be guaranteed proper education. In
order for educators to be competent, they should be provided with high-quality
18
professional development training. For some educators, professional
development is “necessary evil” (Haar, 2001, p. 6) - something that they are
forced to do. On the contrary, it is a powerful tool for implementing innovation.
The only way school systems can move from where they are to where they want
to be is through professional staff development. School improvement cannot
happen without people improvement (Haar, 2001).
Bryan (2000) affirmed that continuous, focused professional development
is the most effective way to build teacher capability. Meaningful staff
development meetings promote collegial conversations which lead to teacher
professional growth. Effective teaching is based not only on what teachers know.
Teachers should know their subject matter well; they are also required to know
how to teach it. Quality professional development programs can provide
educators with the knowledge and the skill they need to dramatically increase
and better student learning (Bryan, 2000; Reid, 2002). Student achievement also
improves when professional development focuses on teachers’ knowledge of
how students learn (Holland, 2005).
According to Sparks (2002), teachers as well as principals can better their
performances through professional learning. Teachers’ professional development
training is a key for determining the quality of teaching. The National Partnership
of Excellence and Accountability in Teaching (NPEAT) stated in its 1999 report
that Michael Fullan (1999) believed that:
School improvement happens when a school develops a professional learning
community that focuses on student work and changes teaching. In order to do
19
that, you need certain kinds of skills, capacities, and relationships. Those are
what professional development can contribute to. Any school that is trying to
improve has to think of professional development as a cornerstone strategy,
(as cited by NPEAT, 1999, p. iii)
Linek, Fleener, Fazio, Raine, and Klakamp (2003) reported the results of a
five-year study in which a university worked with a public school district to form a
professional development program that could enhance student achievement. The
study took place in a small city in Texas. The school district served 4,000
students. It had an early childhood development center, six elementary schools,
one intermediate school, one junior high school and one high school. The study
focused on what happened at three of these public elementary schools when a
field-based teacher education initiative was supplemented by an Academics
2000 grant for professional development. The grant was funded by the Texas
Education Agency. Teachers, administrators, and university personnel
collaborated in this project. Every year there were about 45 teachers, liaisons,
and administrators who participated in the study.
One faculty member was hired as a liaison to help determine the needs of
teachers and faculty members of the three elementary schools. After in-service,
the needs of students and teachers were diagnosed, and then they were
matched to the professional training topics. Teachers were then provided with
various professional development programs including: campus participation in
off-site training, contracting consultants for on-site training, and using a “trainer of
trainer” model in which educators would be involved in formal training and on-
20
campus study groups. The professional development workshops and training
sessions were highly valued by educators. Teachers stated that these
professional development programs enhanced their “bag of tools.”
Data used in this study were gathered over a period of five years. The first
year (1993-1994) was the baseline year prior to the staff development and
teacher education implementation. The 1994-1995 year was the second baseline
year during which the professional development program and teacher education
were implemented. The remaining three years (1995-1998) represented the data
that were collected during the funding of the Academics 2000 grant that included
self-selected professional development activities.
Professional development in the first year of the Academics 2000 grant
incorporated leadership training, training related to diversity in learning, and
programs planned to improve student achievement. During the second year of
the grant, educators selected professional development sessions related to
student leadership, technology, and programs designed for developing
instruction. During the third year of the professional development program,
teachers chose sessions that focused on character education, curriculum
integration, and student inclusion.
The results of the study indicated that elementary teachers perceived the
professional development sessions to be highly effective. They were encouraged
to share what they learned in these sessions with their peers. The study also
showed that enabling classroom teachers to be more responsible of their own
professional growth helped educational leaders meet the needs for their
21
teachers. This made educators more aware of their students’ individual needs
and the materials they taught. The staff development program benefited the
elementary students in various ways that led to a great improvement in their
achievement. The Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) scores of the
third and fourth graders of the three studied campuses showed a significant
increase. By the end of the third year of the staff development program, the third
and fourth grade students received “exemplary” ratings. At the end of the 1998
school year, 90% of the students in the three controlled campuses passed the
reading, writing, and mathematics TAAS. During the five-year review period,
campuses 1, 2 and 3 showed positive passing rate gains of 13.3%, 14.7% and
8.3% in reading and 13.1%, 28.8%, and 16.5% in mathematics, respectively
(Linek et al., 2003).
The findings of this study suggested that professional development is an
effective way to enhance student achievement. Moreover, the researchers
reported that collaborative planning, implementation, and assessment of
professional development programs are essential to shift the focus from the way
educators teach to the way children learn. Such staff development programs
empower teachers and educational leaders and assist them in their continuous
professional growth.
Aims and Purposes of Professional Development
Today, the problem with the majority of the schools “isn’t that they are no
longer what they once were; the problem is that they are precisely what they
once were” (Barth, 2001, p. 28). The primary aim and ultimate purpose of
22
professional development is the improvement of the entire school community
including: students, teachers, staff members, administrators, and educational
leaders.
Holland (2005) stated that a deeper understanding of how teachers learn
and how students think has lead educational leaders to realize the great impact
professional development has on teachers and students. The aim of
professional development is not only to improve teachers’ knowledge of the
subject they are teaching, but also to increase their understanding of how their
students learn. According to Linn (2005), The NCLB approach for accountability
is based on student achievement. If by the academic year 2013-2014 students’
scores- in a specific public school- are not up to the standards set by the NCLB
Act, the school will be held accountable because it did not meet the NCLB
mandated requirements (Linn, 2005). Student achievement is highly affected by
teacher learning; the more effective professional development is the greater
impact it has on student performance (Berry, Hoke, & Hirsch, 2004; Haar, 2001;
Hirsh, Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005; Reid, 2002).
Different Forms of Staff Development
Drago-Severson (2002) stated that according to the emerging literature,
there are six types of staff development models: training (teachers are guided by
an expert), involvement-in-an-improvement process (teachers are part of the
school improvement plan, observation/assessment (teachers are observed by
educational leaders and then evaluated), inquiry (teachers hold investigations to
23
find answers), self-directed (teachers are responsible for their own professional
learning), and mentoring (each teacher is guided and coached by a mentor).
Drago-Severson and Pinto (2003) reported that there are two forms of
staff development: formal and informal. Formal professional development
includes workshops and conferences while informal staff development includes
ongoing conversations about students, developing and critiquing lessons, and
researching. Teachers prefer informal professional development to formal
professional development (Drago-Severson & Pinto). On the other hand, Louie
and Hargrave (2006) stated that there are three different forms of staff
development: 1) Formal professional development- “technology workshops,
summer institutes, credit courses, and study groups” (p. 15); 2) Ongoing or
informal professional development- “coaching, mentoring, and co-teaching” (p.
15); and 3) Online professional development- “online courses and online
workshops” (p. 15).
Peer Mentoring is a professional development tool that educational
leaders can use to help educators improve their instruction. Anderson (2000)
suggests that many teachers favor learning from other teachers. Schools should
be learning environments of collegial support. An educator who has recently
completed a particular university course, for instance, should be encouraged to
share what was learned with colleagues via peer coaching. The educator can
invite teachers to attend class so they can experience the “new” instructional
procedures and strategies being applied. The coach or mentor also attends the
24
classes of his/her peers and helps them implement the newly learnt strategies in
their classes.
Haycock’s Education Trust Organization offers staff development
programs that engage teachers in many discussions about what they are
teaching and how they are teaching. Standards in Practice (SIP) is a program
through which educators discuss students’ results and how students’
achievement can be improved. Teachers meet on regular basis during
schooldays to examine student work. They assess and evaluate students’
performance based on the school standards. Then they decide what strategies
are to be implemented for getting better results. This staff development program
generates a support structure that shields teachers- especially novice,
inexperienced ones. This leads to remarkable improvements in teachers’
performance and students’ achievement (Hirsh, 2005).
Courageous Conversations according to Singleton- the president and
founder of Pacific Educational Group (PEG)- help educators become more
productive. They also make teachers become more passionate learners;
therefore, they should be used as professional development tools. When
educational leaders, teachers, and students engage in courageous
conversations, students feel less threatened and thus learn more. Singleton
encourages teachers to talk to their students about racial issues, poverty, and
respect. Such conversations among school community members influence
students’ and teachers’ growth tremendously (Hirsh, 2005).
25
Hirsh (2005) reports that Ron Ferguson’s The Tripod Project is another
valuable professional development mechanism. Tripod refers to the three
elements that Ferguson considers essential for student success: content,
pedagogy, and relationships. Faculty members and teachers have to keep these
three elements in mind when trying to better students’ and teachers’
performances. Through meetings and planned interactions, educators build a
professional community for sharing ideas. Ferguson stresses that the Tripod
Project is not a program to force compliance; it is rather one that embodies trust
among teachers and promotes trust among students.
According to Sternin and Choo (2000), The Positive Deviance Approach
can be used by school leaders as a professional development tool. He believes
that when someone from outside a particular community provides a solution for a
specific problem, community members may not believe him/her because they did
not invest in the solution. When this “outsider” leaves, the community will not
sustain the changes that the outsider made. Sternin explains that there are six
steps in the Positive Deviance Approach: defining the problem, determining the
positive deviants, determining the practices of the deviants, designing the
interventions, discerning the effectiveness, and disseminating the results. When
using this approach, teachers and educational leaders should think of the school
as a community and start to change their practices from within the community. As
they experience the difference, their attitudes change drastically (Hirsh, 2005).
School systems should follow a comprehensive professional development
plan in which more than one of the previously mentioned programs is used.
26
When educational principals use various types of professional learning
processes, they ensure the improvement of instruction (Sparks, 2002). No matter
what process of staff development teachers participate in, they will benefit greatly
if it is of high-quality (Haar, 2001). Professional development is crucial because it
helps teachers, staff members, and administrators do what they always do better
(Adsit, 2004).
Advantages of Staff Development
Barkley and Bianco (2002) reported that face-to-face staff development
training has four advantages. It gives teachers the chance to learn in a
stimulating environment full of choices. Another advantage is that it provides
teachers with direct feedback. It also gives participating teachers time to reflect.
Moreover, this kind of threat-free setting allows for the learners’ social interaction,
which eventually leads to their growth.
Disadvantages of Staff Development
Critics to traditional face-to-face staff development affirm that it costs
educational leaders a lot of money. They pay enormous prices for substitute
teachers, attendance, and lost instruction (Barkley & Bianco, 2002; Dickenson,
McBride, Lamb-Milligan, & Nichols, 2003). Another disadvantage to traditional
staff development programs- according to Barkley and Bianco- is that they are
not convenient. Many teachers dread to attend staff development conferences or
lectures because of their timing or location. The fact that most face-to-face staff
development programs are not customized (Barkley & Bianco, 2002) is another
drawback; teachers cannot learn at their own pace. If educational leaders
27
disregard the individual differences of teachers, they hinder their professional
growth. Finally, according to Hirsh, Mizell, and Aviss-Spedding (2005) traditional
staff development programs lack collegiality. “Current learning theory indicates
that one-shot, one-size-fits-all workshops and training sessions do not recognize
or support the needs of teachers as adult learners. Adult learners need active,
problem-based, and collegial learning that grows out of and supports the
challenges they face in their daily work” (Hirsh, Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005,
p. 13).
Characteristics of Effective Professional Development
Anderson (2000) emphasized that high-quality professional development
takes time to plan. Decision makers spend a lot of time getting themselves
acquainted with the recent research. They then put time into organizing
professional development programs. Although professional staff development is
time consuming, it leads to better instruction and improved student performance.
For professional staff development to be successful, it should have certain
characteristics. The characteristics that recurred in the literature are discussed at
this point.
Sustained and Ongoing Professional Development
Ongoing learning is a crucial part of professional development (Desimone,
Smith, & Ueno, 2006; Hawley & Valli, 1999; MDE, 1998; NCLB, 2001; NPEAT,
1999; Hirsh, Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005; Salpeter, 2003). Teachers need to
meet daily to develop a deeper understanding of what students are expected to
learn, to examine student progress, to determine what teaching strategies are to
28
be used to facilitate learning, to critique existing strategies, to develop
assessment procedures, to design influential lessons, and much more (Hirsh,
Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005). Moreover, according to Dickenson et al. (2003)
professional development should be a sustained activity that teachers can study,
analyze, and evaluate. Clement and Vandenberghe (2001) believed that
educational leaders should provide their teachers with abundant learning
opportunities because this kind of people investment takes the whole school
system into a higher level.
Teacher Involvement in Professional Development
Teachers should be highly involved in professional staff development
because they know what they exactly need (MDE, 1998). According to NPEAT
(1999), teachers should be involved in the professional training program by
identifying what they want to learn and what kind of experiences they want to
engage in. Dickenson et al. (2003) stressed that teachers’ input is a central factor
for effective professional development; educational leaders have to involve
teachers in their own professional learning if successful experiences are what
they thrive. Educators are the professionals who best know what their students
really need. Sparks (2002) remarked that powerful professional development
engages educators in an intellectually thorough study that meets the
requirements of their students.
Students’ and Teachers’ Needs
According to the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE), professional
development should be primarily school-based because it is an integral part to
29
school operations; professional learning opportunities have to relate to the
individual needs of teachers and students (Hawley & Valli, 1999; MDE, 1998).
Haar (2001) explained that there is no “one-size-fits-all” professional
development that will produce superb results in every educational institution.
Professional development programs have to match the culture and needs of a
specific school community; their content should focus on what students are
required to learn and how to tackle problems students might encounter while
learning (Linek et al., 2003; NPEAT, 1999).
Educators should be given the chance to satisfy their students’ academic
needs while enriching their own practices. Professional development should
assess students’ outcomes as well as teachers’ instruction, and it must be
related to a comprehensive change process that focuses on the improvement of
student achievement (NPEAT, 1999; Hawley & Valli, 1999). Salpeter (2003)
stated that while professional development should focus on the “real” needs of
students, teachers, and the school system as a whole, online professional
development should focus on the “real” uses of technology, that is, the actual
ways that empower teachers’ instruction.
The Importance of Collaboration
Salpeter (2003) and Hawley and Valli (1999) affirmed that for teachers to
experience all benefits possible from a quality professional development
program, it has to be based on collaboration. Adults learn best in groups;
therefore, collaborative problem solving should be an integral part of the
professional development process (NPEAT, 1999). Educators and professional
30
leaders should cooperate throughout the entire process of the professional
development training. Quality staff development has to be planned, implemented,
and followed up by a team of professional educators (Goodlad, 1994; Salpeter,
2003). Goodlad emphasized that even the assessment and evaluation of the staff
development program should also be done collaboratively.
Support and Follow-up
For professional development training to be effective, it should involve
follow-up and support (NPEAT, 1999; MDE, 1998; Salpeter, 2003). To support
teacher learning, educational leaders need to form interpersonal relationships
with the teachers and focus on their personal growth (Drago-Severson, 2002).
According to Salpeter, well-trained educational leaders who encourage and
support teachers throughout their professional training are important catalysts for
the maintenance of quality professional development. Principals should also
provide educators with direct feedback and continuous evaluation (Clement &
Vandenberghe, 2001) to help them grow professionally. Killion (2002) stressed
that supportive leadership is a must in professional development training.
Quality Professional Development
Barnett (2004) reported a study that took place in selected high schools in
South Dakota. The purpose of the study was to figure out the characteristics and
effectiveness of staff development that was incorporated in these selected high
schools. Forty high schools were randomly selected from South Dakota’s school
directory, and ten teachers were randomly chosen from each high school. Data
collection was done through survey instruments that were mailed to each of
31
those high school teachers. The primary survey instruments were mailed at the
beginning of September 1998. The research questions in the survey were directly
related to the characteristics and effectiveness of professional development
programs that were employed in these forty high schools.
The research findings indicated that most teachers believed that the
professional development techniques that were used in their schools promoted
their growth. These staff development programs were based on the needs of
teachers and administrators. Moreover, the majority of the participants stated that
teachers and administrators planned and implemented these programs
collaboratively. They formed committees through which they jointly evaluated the
professional development activities. Participants also agreed that the mentoring
provided by their leaders was an effective staff development tool. Furthermore,
they stated that short, well organized staff meetings, which included practical
information teachers could actually use in their classrooms, could be very
effective professional development means. The study also pointed out that
teachers were satisfied with the way their high schools and districts were
planning, implementing, and evaluating professional development. They thought
it was very effective because teachers, administrators, and educational leaders
actively participated in the process (Barnett, 2004).
Today, effective professional development is no longer done via “sit and
get” sessions (Haar, 2001, p. 8); it is ongoing training that is supported and
followed-up by educational leaders. Quality professional training should be
planned with the end in mind and it is the responsibility of superintendents,
32
principals, professional developers, and teachers (Haar, 2001). According to
Zenger and Uehlein (2001) and Burke (1994), effective staff development should
include traditional and online professional learning. A blended solution- a
combination of online and face-to-face professional development programs-
allows each form of training to be delivered in the best possible way with utmost
flexibility.
Hokanson and Hooper (2004) asserted that “The future of technology is
not to make education easier, but rather to make learning more effective” (p.
250). There is a rapid spread of Internet connectivity among public schools in the
United States (Collins & Dewees, 2001). Wilcox, Bauschard, and Osterhus
(1998) emphasized that students are taking the information superhighway
whether teachers decide to join them or not. Therefore, teachers and educational
leaders should know how to use technology- the Internet specifically- as an
educational tool. To be able to do that teachers and leaders have to participate in
online professional development. Bush (2005) and Fletcher (2005) noted that the
significance of technology integration is accentuated in The National Education
Technology Plan (NETP) of the No Child Left Behind Act that calls for
incorporating technology into professional development and curriculum
development to enhance student learning and achievement.
“It is evident that teachers need, and will continue to need, professional
development geared toward new technology” (Cole & Styron, 2005, p. 4).
According to Oelrich (2001), teachers need professional development programs
that will keep them informed of the latest topics in education without losing
valuable instruction time away from their students. As a former specialist in the
Information Systems Department of the Pascagoula School District, Dr. Parker
once said, "It is not enough to be an active member of a school team; all of our
children deserve the benefit of ideas from colleagues throughout the state and
nation." E-learning, online education and virtual schools can provide this kind of
meaningful professional development. Virtual schools help educational leaders
offer their teachers high quality online professional development on technology
implementation and other educational topics (Oelrich, 2001).
Research suggests that technology can be a very effective teaching and
learning tool in the classroom (Collins & Dewees, 2001); Internet- specifically- is
unique in its ability to provide educators with the most accurate and recent
information via its advanced communication potentials (Golden, 2004). According
to Ireh (2006), technology integration improves students’ academic
achievements. Realizing the power computers possess as educational tools,
teachers nowadays are more willing to integrate computers into their instructions.
Computers can be integrated as either teacher-centered tools or student-
centered tools. In the teacher-centered integration model, teachers use the
computer to plan their lessons, enrich their explanations, or explain certain
concepts. On the other hand, in the student-centered integration approach the
teacher is the facilitator who assigns computer projects to students. Both
approaches empower teachers and students (Wang, 2000).
34
To ensure that teachers effectively integrate technology in their
classrooms, effective professional development is needed. The problems related
to integrating technology into classroom instruction can be ameliorated with
professional development for both teachers and administrators (Collins &
Dewees, 2001). Technology-based professional development should be all about
“teaching with technology not teaching about technology” (Ireh, 2006, p. 14).
Effectiveness of Online Professional Development
Bush (2005) discussed what happened to schools in the Mobile County
Public School System in Alabama after the introduction of an online professional
development program. The purpose of the new staff development plan was to
increase teachers’ knowledge in using educational technology which would lead
to an enhancement in students’ achievement. The Mobile County Public School
System in Alabama is a large school district that includes 103 schools with more
than 65,000 students. The district has about 4,000 teachers with widely
dispersed locations; therefore, the district’s technology division decided that
making an online computer training course available would provide the
consistency needed to achieve the state's directive. In 2002-2003 the Mobile
County Public School System was awarded an Enhancing Education Through
Technology (EETT) federal grant. The $441,293 grant was given by the Alabama
Department of Education.
The technology division in the Mobile County Public School System
decided to use the EETT grant to implement the new professional development
program. They chose the Teachers Discovering Computers course from the
35
Teacher Education Institute (TEI). The first group of teachers began their
professional development lessons in spring 2003. These educators had to
produce their own web pages, storyboard a website to support a lesson, plan and
design curriculum pages, and develop usable projects that adapted to their
specific needs as teachers. To motivate the participants, educational leaders
rewarded teachers with computers for completing the online course. All
participating teachers also obtained continuing education credits. Because the
course lasted for 13 weeks, the technology division assigned a technology
resource teacher to take the online course along with classroom teachers.
Through this arrangement, classroom teachers were given all the assistance and
guidance they needed (Bush, 2005).
The study reported that over 104 teachers successfully completed the
online professional development course. Several of these participants requested
additional online development courses. Moreover, the study stated that the
district was planning to continue offering the online professional development
course because teachers confirmed that it was an excellent introduction to
technology integration. They also affirmed that it was an effective professional
development tool. Based on the results of the study, educational leaders in the
Mobile County Public School System stated that The Teachers Discovering
Computers online professional development course made a difference in the use
of technology by their teachers. It presented an excellent overview of technology
integration for classroom educators. The technology division in the Mobile
County Public School System decided that teachers who completed the
36
Teachers Discovering Computers foundation course may be offered more
advanced online professional development courses such as the institute's
Teachers Discovering & Integrating Microsoft Office and Teaching with Web
Quests online courses (Bush, 2005).
Different Forms of Online Professional Development
Killion (2000) suggested that online learning can help build educators’
expertise using convenient, user-friendly technologies. Online professional
development includes various types of technology. Killion (2000) stated that
online- when used in the literature- refers to any kind of instruction that is
delivered via the World Wide Web. However, other kinds of computer-based
programs that are on CDs or delivered via Intranet are also called online. In
2002, Killion introduced new definitions to differentiate between computer-based
professional development and Internet-based professional development.
Computer-aided instruction and tutorials are examples of computer-based
learning; online courses and web-based videoconferencing are examples of
Internet-based learning (Killion, 2002).
According to Vojtek and Vojtek (1996) quality professional development
can be done online in a variety of ways. The Internet is a very powerful tool
through which teachers can accomplish a lot of tasks. Teachers can access
articles, books, and journals and obtain information from different databases in
libraries around the world. They can also visit virtual museums, historical sites,
international parks, zoos and the like. Educators can get in contact with other
professionals via e-mail and share their problems, concerns, and victories. They
37
can contact professional organizations, too- such as NSDC and MDE. Moreover,
educators can access online lesson plans and instructional materials- such as,
worksheets; they can even publish their own online materials. Teachers can also
conduct research- independently or with their students- about topics they are
covering in their classes (Vojtek & Vojtek, 1996).
The Public Broadcasting Services (PBS) TeacherLine is one of the leading
online professional development resources in the nation. The U.S. Department of
Education funded the PBS TeacherLine program as a grant to help teachers
become highly-qualified. PBS TeacherLine offers standard-based online courses,
which cover the entire curriculum, to K-12 teachers and principals. Educators can
register for any online module that is either related to the specific content they
teach, their instructional methodology, or technology integration depending on
their needs. Online professional development offered by the PBS TeacherLine is
self-paced, flexible and research-based. Moreover, teachers can earn Continuing
Education Unit (CEU) credits for their PBS TeacherLine courses. Online learning
provided by PBS TeacherLine is closely monitored by facilitators who guide and
support educators throughout their online professional training. Another asset of
the online courses offered by PBS TeacherLine is that they are developed in
collaboration with the following top academic organizations: International Society
for Technology in Education (ISTE), the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics (NCTM), and The Concord Consortium. PBS TeacherLine also
provides educators with My Workspace- a place for them to “bookmark” their
favorite Web sites, share their instructional technology tips with other educators,
38
and post their own reflections. The PBS TeacherLine is one of the teacher
opportunities provided by the Office of Leadership and Professional Development
at Mississippi Department of Education (MDE). The PBS TeacherLine Web site
is found at: [http://teacherline.pbs.org/teacherline].
Advantages of Online Professional Development
Killion (2000) named four advantages of online professional learning.
Access to online learning is easy and convenient. It requires a computer, a
modem, and the Internet. Online professional development benefits educators
who find it difficult to attend face-to-face staff development conferences because
of the inconvenient time or location. Online professional development is
independent of time and place (Barkley & Bianco, 2002; McKenzie, 1998; Vojtek
& Vojtek, 1996). It is available 24 hours a day seven days a week (Bintrim, 2002);
teachers can learn and revisit websites at any time (Kenser, 2001). Through
online professional development, teachers have access to hundreds of topics
provided by various sources, not only their districts (Killion, 2000). Adsit (2004)
stated that one of the benefits of Technology-Mediated Professional
Development (TMPD) is that it provides teachers with access to a wide variety of
resources so that they can better their practices. Glyer (2004) added that one-
person departments are common, nowadays. The computer and the various
technological tools embedded in the World Wide Web provide all the strategies
and plans needed for educators to develop and grow professionally. A single
professional development coordinator or principal cannot offer staff development
39
training to hundreds of teachers within the same district unless it is done online
(Glyer, 2004).
Another advantage of online professional learning according to Killion
(2000) is flexibility. Participating teachers have the freedom to learn at their own
pace (Barkley & Bianco, 2002; Killion, 2000; McKenzie, 1998). Some online
courses are unscheduled, for instance, teachers can finish a certain course in six
months. Others are scheduled and require teachers to start and end the course
on specific dates. While most of the courses are asynchronous- available 24
hours a day, some are synchronous- require learners to be online at the same
time. Asynchronous courses allow teachers to control the time they need to
spend on a specific session. Some participants devote more time on particular
assignments, while others spend more time on discussions or projects. This
flexibility makes professional growth accessible to all educators (Killion, 2000).
Cost control is another advantage of online professional development
(Killion, 2000). On the long run, district officials can save travel costs and money
associated with substitutes, materials, and loss of instruction (Barkley & Bianco,
2002; Killion, 2000; McKenzie, 1998). Another cost efficient factor is ease of
modification. Online programs, unlike printed training manuals, are easily and
quickly updated. When participating in online professional development, teachers
and educational leaders realize that time is better spent. Adult learners have
fewer distractions and thus can concentrate more on what they are learning.
Some online course developers suggest that one hour of online learning equals
to two hours of classroom instruction (Killion, 2000).
40
Another asset of online professional development according to Killion
(2000) is collaboration and interaction. Quality, well-designed online programs
encourage adult learners to interact not only with one another but also with the
instructor. Adsit (2004) reported that Technology-Mediated Professional
Development (TMPD) is a powerful tool because it diminishes teacher seclusion
and supplies educators with opportunities for collegiality. Oelrich (2001)
explained that online workshops minimize teacher isolation. Being in their
classrooms all day, educators have little- if any- contact with other professionals.
When they participate in online workshops, they can interact with and learn from
teachers at their own schools and others around the nation. Teachers can
engage in online group discussions, solve assignments together, work on group
projects, provide feedback to one another, and have personal interactions with
the instructor (Killion, 2000; Oelrich, 2001).
McKenzie (1998) and Oelrich (2001) stated that another compelling
advantage of online professional development is that it allows educational
leaders to customize training programs to meet the particular needs of teachers.
Instead of having all teachers gather and attend a staff development lecture or
workshop, the educational leader can assign different online professional
development programs to different teachers based on their individual needs
(McKenzie, 1998; Oelrich, 2001).
Bryan (2000) added that e-mail is another advantage of online learning. E-
mail is one of the technological tools that make a great impact on teacher
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
41
professional development. Through the use of e-mail, teachers can access all the
information they need in a fraction of a minute (Bryan).
Control shift is another asset of online learning according to McKenzie
(1998). Control moves from the instructor to the student teacher. Educators are
engaged in actual learning experiences when they participate in online
professional learning; they are not just passive listeners who are lectured to.
Kenser (2001) stated that practice, observation, and coaching are other
advantages that are present in the online professional development programs.
Educators who participate in online learning have the chance to practice new
learned concepts on their own or with the help of the technology instructor who is
always available to train them, support them, and give them feedback.
Disadvantages of Online Professional Development
According to Killion (2000), there are three disadvantages to online
professional learning. When planning online professional development,
educational leaders have to think about hidden costs- costs that are associated
with online learning. Costs vary depending on the program format, hardware and
software needed, internet access, course development, and the intended
outcomes.
Another pitfall of online learning according to Killion (2000) is content.
Some contents are not suitable to be delivered online. “Online staff development
cannot yet replace the more costly staff development components of practice,
coaching, and feedback needed to make and sustain deep and lasting change in
practice and ultimately in student achievement” (p. 6).
42
Killion (2000) explained that another drawback that educational leaders
need to consider is learner readiness. Not all teachers are ready for online
learning. Some educators lack the motivation, independence, and support
required for participating in online professional development. Other teachers
might resist online professional development due to their fear of failure when
technology implementation is at stake (Oelrich, 2001). Some adult learners need
the human interaction that is present in face-to-face staff development, yet
scarce in online professional development modules (Kenser, 2001; Killion 2000);
educated experts want immediate, tangible feedback (Killion, 2000).
Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Learning According to Richardson
(2001)
Richardson (2001) explained that the advantages and disadvantages of
online professional development depend on the way it is implemented. Online
professional development can be implemented in two different ways. A teacher
sits at a computer at home looking at different lesson plans and then answers
questions that the instructor posts on the web. When the online course is over,
the teacher receives a number of in-service points. The teacher participating in
such an online professional development course does not have a chance to
interact with other professionals. On the other hand, using conferencing software
allows for an interaction with professionals. A teacher is connected online to
other educators who teach the same subject matter. They develop lesson plans
and edit each others’ work; and after they apply what they have learned in their
classrooms, they share their experiences in an online group discussion. Online
43
professional development- if done the latter way- enables teachers to develop
(Richardson, 2001).
The Role of Educational Leaders in Providing Staff Development Programs
The Influence of Educational Leaders on Staff Development
A 2000 study by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)
showed that approximately 2.7 million extra teachers are needed over the next
decade to support the United States’ growing public school enrollment. Many
schools are struggling to recruit qualified teachers (Oelrich, 2001). However,
according to Salpeter (2003), the problem school leaders are facing when trying
to maintain highly-qualified teachers is not solved by recruiting new ones, but
rather by retaining the existing teachers. The key to holding on to qualified
teachers is high-quality, effective professional training.
Researchers emphasize that educational leaders need to view teachers
as developing individuals that are either positively or negatively affected by the
context of professional development (Johnson et al., 2001). Drago-Severson and
Pinto (2003) asserted that “effective leadership for faculty development demands
a balance of supporting teachers and gently challenging them while focusing on
the interests of students and the school” (p. 37). An integral part of the leader’s
role in professional development is one of guidance and support (Drago-
Severson, 2002; Haar, 2001; Killion, 2002).
Being staff developers, educational leaders have to set high standards of
professional growth for all school community members (Haar, 2001). They
should also ensure that the professional development programs teachers, staff
44
members, and leaders participate in not only match these high standards, but are
also designed to prepare and support educational experts as they engage in the
process of change (Holland, 2005).
Teachers must be provided with professional development opportunities
that focus on the subject matter they teach. Leaders should make sure that
teachers’ professional learning is aligned with their real, everyday work
experiences (Holland, 2005). Teachers should also be given ample time for
professional development. It should be a process that stretches over a period of
time rather than a one-shot conference or workshop (Haar, 2001; Holland, 2005).
Restoring teachers’ workdays might be essential for improving professional
development experiences (Sparks, 2002).
Superintendents and school principals need to make sure that school
districts use reliable systems to evaluate the impact professional development
has on teachers’ performances and student learning (Holland, 2005). When
professional developers assess and evaluate the professional development
programs, they can mend the ineffective ones to best fit students’ and teachers’
needs (Hirsh, Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005).
According to the Hirsh, Mizell, and Aviss-Spedding (2005), educational
leaders should also effectively seek data to determine what kind of professional
development program they should implement in their district or school.
Professional staff development should be research-based (Lauer, Dean, Martin-
Glenn, & Asensio, 2005). Moreover, leaders have to ensure that professional
45
development training is team-focused (Hirsh, Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005).
Adults learn best when they are put in teams (Rose, 1996).
Designing a professional development plan that is based on the specific
needs of teachers and students is also vital. The leader should make sure that
teachers’ knowledge and skills are respected and well utilized in the professional
development programs; this does not negate the need for teachers to be
provided with pertinent research and resources. Leaders should use professional
development training as a tool to reinvigorate teachers especially novice,
reluctant ones (Haar, 2001).
Decision makers should also make sure that the professional development
services are well planned (Hirsh, Mizell, & Aviss-Spedding, 2005) with the end in
mind (Haar, 2001). Moreover, teachers regard their principals as effective
educational leaders when the principals view professional development as a
basic element of their school improvement plan and have active involvement in it
(Haar, 2001).
Before implementing a new professional development program,
educational leaders have to plan it thoroughly based on the purpose, vision,
values, and goals of the school (Haar, 2001). The chances of meeting teachers’
needs increase when teachers are actively involved in the planning of
professional development programs. Teacher involvement in planning results in
high-quality professional development (Desinone, Porter, Birman, Garet, & Yoon,
2002). “Professional development must shift from a fragmented system based
upon one-shot activities to one which is embedded in the every day life of the
46
school. It must be planned and implemented by the educators it is designed to
serve” (MDE, 1998).
District officials have a direct impact on professional development. The
results of the study- a comparison of three school districts- done by Firestone,
Mangin, Martinez, and Polovsky (2005)- suggested that teaching is affected by
the district offices via professional development. The district vision, human
resource management, and stress on professional development influence
professional development programs. The results of the study showed that the
district with the most coherent and focused professional development had the
greatest teacher-reported influence on teachers’ performances and practices
(Firestone et al., 2005).
School principals and superintendents should also make sure that their
teachers and staff members are receiving the technology-based professional
development they need. Ongoing evaluation of technology implementations in
public schools is fundamental (Collins & Dewees, 2001). According to the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Gulf Coast
Education Initiative Consortium (GCEIC), only 53% of teachers in the United
States integrate technology into their instruction. Educators who do not
incorporate software or Internet in their classes attribute that to the lack of
computers in their classrooms, lack of time, and lack of training in using
instructional technology. School principals should ensure that teachers are given
the opportunity, time, equipment, and training needed for them to integrate
47
technology into their classes. Online professional development is the answer
(Collins & Dewees, 2001).
Educational leaders have to recognize the great impact they possess on
professional staff development (Desimone, Smith, & Ueno, 2006). They should
also be conscious of the reasons it might be ineffective, so that they can
ameliorate them. These reasons are: lack of teachers’ readiness for change,
teachers’ poor understanding of the professional development basics, teacher
resistance to change, lack of resources, lack of support, or lack of appropriate
planning (Dickenson et al., 2003).
What Educational Leaders Can Do to Promote Effective Staff Development
Educational leaders- whether vigorous or lackadaisical- have a great
effect on the quality of teaching. They also play a fundamental role in giving the
support and the pressure needed for quality professional development to be
started and sustained (Sparks, 2002). Sparks also stated that for
transformational change to be accepted, it should begin in the educational
leaders. As noted by Dufour and Berkey (1995), professional development for
school principals communicates to educators the value of ongoing learning.
Through caring about their own growth, educational leaders model how vital
professional development really is which helps teachers feel less threatened and
more encouraged to pursue their own professional growth. Principals and
superintends have to lead by examples. They should model professional growth
to teachers, administrators, and staff members by participating in professional
development programs. They should not only attend the committee meetings but
48
also be active participants. The way they talk and the language they use
empowers or weakens all members of the school community (Sparks, 2002).
Educational leaders have to participate in collecting the data, forming the staff
development plan, implementing it, and assessing it (Dufour & Berkey, 1995;
Sparks, 2002).
Anderson (2000) stated that educational leaders should build a staff
development committee that is made up of teachers, staff members,
administrators, and parents. The purpose of this committee is to give its
members the chance to share their ideas about the new staff development
strategy. Clement and Vandenberghe (2001) stressed that teachers should
participate in the planning and decision making of their own professional
development. When teachers feel they have control over their own learning, they
will be more willing to collaborate and thus develop professionally. Committee
meetings are set to provide all committee members with equal opportunities to
agree with or object to a certain procedure. Professional development
committees should meet before the school year starts and study the staff
development program they want to implement. They should then develop a plan
after they reach a consensus. Close collaboration among all committee members
facilitates the process. Furthermore, the committee members have to closely
monitor the application of the new program. They should also evaluate the
program by assessing teachers’ and students’ development throughout the
school year (Anderson, 2000).
49
McKenzie (1991) affirmed that for educational leaders to help promote
quality professional development, they have to make sure that the staff
development programs are experience-based. Teachers, similar to their
students, learn by doing. Sitting and listening passively to staff development
lectures, teachers would not benefit as much. Dickenson et al. (2003) stress that
it is not sufficient for educational leaders to simply expose teachers to new ideas
in lectures and workshops; educators should have an active role in the process.
For educators to change the way they have been teaching for the past few years,
they have to be actively involved in their own professional development practices
(McKenzie, 1991).
Teachers, especially novice ones, fear change (McKenzie, 1999).
Educational leaders, being the professional development experts, should keep
this phenomenon in mind. To help reluctant teachers overcome their doubts and
anxieties, administrators should show them measurable results of students’
achievements. They have to present proof that students’ test scores have
improved after the teachers joined certain professional development programs.
Moreover, educational leaders ought to eliminate all risks and surprises, at least
until the teachers get used to the new system. Teachers should be given
experiences that require little risk at the beginning of the professional
development plan (McKenzie, 1999).
As noted by Dickenson et al. (2003), any deviation from teachers’
“established practices” or “comfort zones” may lead to confusion and discomfort.
Therefore, principals and superintendents have to offer ample support and
50
encouragement to their teachers and staff members. Guskey (2002) explained
that educators are reluctant to adopt new teaching strategies unless they are
sure they will succeed. Thus, continual support is more important than training.
Teachers- especially novice ones- need experts at their side when something
goes wrong. Educational leaders must emphasize how vital team work is in
professional development. When anxious teachers get the support of their
colleagues, they will feel less threatened. Collegiality, openness and trust among
teachers and leaders are crucial for meaningful professional development to
occur (Clement & Vandenberghe, 2001). Teachers who are hesitant when it
comes to new professional development programs change their minds when their
leaders give them incentives (Bush, 2005; McKenzie, 1999). Coaching and giving
direct feedback and evaluation to participants is also crucial (Clement &
Vandenberghe, 2001; Bush, 2005). The more recognition the administrators
provide, the less reluctant the teachers feel (McKenzie, 1999).
According to Fulton and Riel (1999) and Sparks (2002), educational
leaders should promote professional development through learning communities.
A learning community is “group of people who share a common interest in a topic
or area as well as a particular way of talking about the phenomena, tools, and
sense-making approaches for building their collaborative knowledge with a set of
common collective tasks” (Fulton & Riel, 1999, p. 519). Quality professional
development that offers teachers time to collaborate with each other and update
their information and skills has been identified by educators as a significant factor
in school reform. Such professional staff development goes beyond in-service
51
training and generic face-to-face delivery models to a more flexible and ongoing
engagement with other learned professionals. Learning communities allow
educational leaders to involve teachers in school reform. Educators in learning
communities can establish connections with experts inside and outside the
school. They also receive pedagogical, emotional and technical support when
they are in the process of professional growth (Fulton & Riel, 1999).
Educational Leaders Promoting Online Professional Development
“Online learning, in a good course, can be more immediate than some
face-to-face instruction” (Wood, 2005, p. 34). Louie and Hargrave (2006) stated
in the report they prepared for the Massachusetts Department of Education that
achieving full technology integration and technology literacy for students and
teachers requires educational leaders to be committed and highly motivated;
however, the outcomes of such hard work are very rewarding. Superintendents’
and principals’ efforts tied to teachers’ expertise in providing technology-
integrated instruction prepare students to better deal with our growing,
challenging world. Ertmer et al. (2002) suggested that a strong infrastructure is
needed for technology to be integrated into classroom instruction, and strong
educational leaders are necessary to promote and sustain such integration. “The
real information technology (IT) issues are not about products but rather are
about the effective use of resources and the effective delivery of services-about
how information technology aids and advances the institutional mission” (Green,
2006, p. 44).
52
Educational leaders have to make sure that they offer online professional
development opportunities that help teachers engage their students in
technology-based learning (Cole & Styron, 2005). According to Killion (2002),
before implementing online professional development, educational leaders have
to consider a number of aspects. They have to measure the effectiveness of
online learning based on teacher practice and student results rather than on the
number of participants or teacher preference for online over face-to-face staff
development. Moreover, decision makers need to use the NSDC’s standards as
a guide for quality online learning which should be part of a plan that contains a
vision for online professional development, offers various learning opportunities
to meet teachers’ needs, is based on student achievement, and is subjected to
continuous evaluation. Leaders also need to make sure that the online
professional development programs they want to implement offer substantial
content related to the needs of their teachers and students and are aligned with
the curriculum. Besides, educational supervisors should implement online
professional development programs that have flexible contents. Content flexibility
allows teachers to tailor online learning processes to their own needs (Killion,
2002 ).
Knowing that online learning programs can be accessed 24/7, educational
leaders think that teachers have all the time flexibility they need. However,
teacher learning in regular time- within teachers’ workdays- is vital for ongoing
development to occur. Educators need not be isolated from the whole learning
community when they are participating in any kind of professional development,
53
whether online or face-to-face. Therefore, teachers are to be given time at school
to participate in online professional development programs. School and district
leaders have to also keep in mind their teachers’ readiness to be online learners.
Ongoing support and guidance motivate the educators and encourage them to
be committed to their learning. Kleyn-Kennedy (2006) added that the educational
leader has to not only encourage, but also facilitate teachers’ use of technology.
The more technology-based professional development they receive, the less
intimidated they feel about integrating technology into their instruction. When
teachers feel well-equipped, their self efficacy and self esteem will be boosted;
this will lead them to incorporate technology into their instruction (Kleyn-
Kennedy). Principals and superintendents have to give wings to their teachers
and show them how they are maneuvered before they actually ask them to flap
their wings and fly (Killion, 2002; Kleyn-Kennedy, 2006).
Decision makers have to acknowledge the importance of facilitators.
Teachers who participate in online learning benefit greatly from the technology
facilitator, especially if they are novice. Technical support is a must. School and
district leaders should also consider the interactivity of the online professional
development programs. Many educators drop out of online learning processes
because they are not interactive and they lack direction and support. Educational
leaders should implement online programs that contain immediate feedback,
frequent assessment, and numerous assignments; these will give teachers all the
direction and motivation they long for. Furthermore, educational leaders should
provide teachers with suitable learning environments to access online learning
54
resources. This increases educator’ efficiency. Finally, decision makers have to
make sure that the online professional development programs they choose to
implement are aligned with the districts’ and schools’ student learning goals and
teachers’ performance expectations (Killion, 2002).
Challenges Educational Leaders Need to Consider When Implementing Quality
Professional Development
Drago-Severson and Pinto (2003) noted that the educational leader’s
ability to initiate and sustain quality professional staff development is highly
affected by the school’s human resources- teachers, staff members and
administrators and how they all function together. Decision makers have to keep
the following challenges in mind when trying to implement a new professional
development program. First, they should consider the challenge of time. It is not
easy for principals to schedule professional development training during school
days; teachers simply do not have the time for their own learning when they are
in their classrooms all day long. The second challenge is resistance to change.
Educational leaders have to help teachers understand the change process. They
should give them ample support and guidance to help them walk through the
unknown (Ertmer et al., 2002). The third challenge is the broadening of teachers’
perspectives. Teachers need to be aware of their assumptions. They need to see
where they stand now and where they will be after participating in a quality
professional development program. Educational leaders should help teachers
widen their perspectives by providing continuous support and time for self
reflection. The fourth challenge is the need for process orientation. Principals
55
have to connect with their teachers by paying attention to their values, emotions,
and feelings. To overcome these challenges, leaders need to understand the
fears and concern that teachers possess. They should also alter teachers’ daily
schedules to allow for collaborative time for professional development (Drago-
Severson & Pinto, 2003).
An additional challenge educational leaders have to be concerned with,
according to Collins & Dewees (2001), is computer and Internet access. There is
a rapid spread of Internet connectivity among public schools in the United States;
nonetheless, imbalance of access continues to be a problem. In 1997, public
schools with a majority of low income students- 71 percent of students were
eligible for free or reduced lunch funds- were less likely to have internet access
than public schools with a minority of low income students-11 percent of
students were eligible for free or reduced lunch funds. Moreover, public schools
with a high percentage of minority students- 50 or more- had less Internet access
than public schools with a low percentage of minority students- less than six
percent (Collins & Dewees). Principals and district officials have to make sure
that all teachers and students have access to computers that are connected to
the Internet.
Principals and superintendents need to consider all of the aforementioned
aspects before they implement a new staff development program. According to
Anderson (2000), student performance and teacher professional development
are highly correlated. The professional development environment has to be
characterized with safety, open-mindedness, and support. Furthermore, the staff
56
development programs should be tailored to the specific needs of the educators
and students for educational leaders to witness improvement in students’ as well
as teachers’ performances. Educational leaders need to start by familiarizing
themselves with the research. Any kind of professional development program
they decide to implement in their schools has to be research-based. Careful
planning, supportive leadership, and data driven decision making are all basic
requirements for quality professional development to be attained (Killion, 2002).
Another important factor that educational leaders have to consider is the level of
development their teachers and staff members are functioning at.
Implementing Quality Professional Development Programs
Engstrom and Danielson (2006) reported the results of a study that
investigated teachers’ perceptions of how a particular school district
implemented, sustained, and supported a professional development program that
was led by teachers. The study was held in a small, rural district where teachers
were considered exemplary. These teachers were asked to serve on the district’s
Staff Development Committee (SDC). The school district partnered with the local
university to implement the Arts Council grant. The purpose of the grant was to
provide educators with professional development on Gardner’s Multiple
Intelligence (Ml) Theory.
Members of the SDC were the district’s curriculum director, a building
principal, two teachers from each of the districts four schools, and a community
member. The committee met on monthly basis. Committee members worked on
designing, implementing, and assessing professional development programs,
57
one of which was based on Gardner’s Ml theory. During the 3 semesters in which
the one-credit hour seminar on Gardner’s Ml theory was offered, 40% of the
district’s educators registered for the course. Teachers were also given the
chance to enroll in area workshops on Ml theory.
Thirty educators were invited to participate in this qualitative study, but
only eleven teachers did. These teachers were elementary, intermediate, and
high school teachers. To gather data from the participants, SDC members used
three qualitative data sets: a focused writing, an interview, and unit or lesson
artifacts. The focused writing was used to show the concerns that the teachers
had as they implemented the Ml theory in their classes. The interview
demonstrated the teachers’ understanding of what they did in their classes and
why they did it. The artifacts presented evidence of how the teachers were
implementing the Ml theory in their classes (Engstrom & Danielson, 2006).
Engstrom and Danielson (2006) stated that the teachers who participated
in the study stressed that collegiality among members at the district and building
levels encouraged them to continue learning. Educators also stated that they
were given ample opportunity to participate in various professional development
programs that were led by the SDC. This gave the teachers ownership of their
own learning. Participants in this study noted that the administrative support that
existed across the district helped them greatly. This study showed that a
connection has to exist between the district’s central office and the school
buildings. Professional development is a process that should be done
58
collaboratively. Teachers, administrators, and district officials should work hand
in hand for professional development to be successful.
Clement and Vandenberghe (2001) reported the results of a study that
took place in two suburban Flemish elementary schools. The first school-
Heathlandpool- served 438 students and the second- Writerscourt- had 280
pupils. The school leader of Heathlandpool had twelve years of experience as a
principal, and the school leader of Writerscourt had only three. The purpose of
the study was to test the effect of collegiality on professional development. The
relationship between the principal and the teachers at Heathlandpool showed a
richly diverse collegiality that did not deny teachers their autonomy. Teachers
often told the principal about what was happening in their classrooms. They
chatted in the corridors and during breaks. The principal encouraged teachers to
come to her for advice. She was always willing to listen to teachers’ ideas and
concerns about students, curriculum, or instructional issues. On the other hand,
the relationship between the principal and the teachers at Writerscourt
elementary school was different. Educators felt that they could not share their
opinions with their principal. He was viewed as a person who did not encourage
collaboration. Collegiality between the school leader and the teachers was very
minimal. Teachers at Writerscourt reported that the learning experience they got
from their relationship with their principal was very scarce.
The results of this qualitative study proved that collegial interactions
should exist between school leaders and their teachers for teacher education to
occur. Quality professional development can not thrive in a “collegiality-free”
59
school environment. Friendly communication between principals and teachers is
the key for producing learning opportunities that allow educators to prosper.
Educational leaders’ support is a vital element for high quality professional
development to exist (Clement & Vandenberghe, 2001).
Educational Leaders and the Digital Natives
As Killion (2000) noted colleges, universities, and professional
associations- nationwide- are increasing their use of online and web-based
courses. Virtual universities- ones that offer undergraduate and graduate
degrees that are fully online- are becoming commonplace around the world
(Killion, 2000). This confirms that some people are more technology-oriented
than others. “An essential component of facilitating learning is understanding
learners” (Oblinger, 2003, p. 37). Today, educational leaders have to be
conscious of the fact that not only their K-12 students, but also a number of their
teachers are Digital Natives. Digital Natives also referred to as Generation Y,
M illennial, and Nexters (people who were born after 1980) are different from
Boomers (people who were born between 1943 and 1960) and Gen-Xers or
Generation X (people who were born between 1960 and 1980) (Denham &
Adbow, 2002; Oblinger, 2003; Wood, 2006; Zemke, 2001). They view technology
as a natural part of their environment; they work more effectively in teams; and
they are more Internet-savvy than previous generations (Oblinger). Weiler (2004)
added that they are visual learners who prefer hands-on experiences that are
directly related to their needs. Being vigilant to the unique learning demands of
Generation Y students, educational leaders have to plan professional
60
development accordingly keeping in mind students and teachers who belong to
this digital generation.
According to Clifford (2005), decision makers need to realize that students
are already utilizing various digital technologies for work and leisure; and if
educators are properly trained, they can direct them to use technology not only
more responsibly, but also as an educational tool. Johnson (2004) explained that
Generation Y students and teachers use technological devices such as, cell
phones, handheld computers, and wireless laptops in their daily lives. Shreve
(2005) stressed that even computer games “could help motivate students to
understand things they couldn’t, or wouldn’t, learn before” (p. 30). “Schools need
to learn to use these technologies to enhance educational experiences, not
ignore or ban them. This generation will not be willing to leave their virtual lives at
the school door” (Johnson, 2004, p. 8).
Summary
Whether teachers, administrators, or staff members are ready to accept
this fact or not, technology (computer and the Internet) is a vital part of students’
everyday lives (Wang, 2000). Integrating technology not only in the classroom,
but also in classroom instruction helps our students learn. Children today seem
to be more comfortable with the use of technology than adults are (Oblinger,
2003). For teachers to effectively use the computer and the Internet as
educational tools, they need to be well trained. Professional development that
focuses on incorporating computers and the Internet into classroom instruction
helps teachers keep up with today’s rapidly changing world of technology.
61
Educators can benefit greatly from technology if they are given the proper
training (Anderson, 2000). Thus, online professional development is no longer a
luxury; it is a basic need that educational leaders have to make sure their
teachers are not only provided with, but also well trained in.
This chapter showed various aspects of professional development. It shed
light on the vitality of professional staff development for school success. The
aims and purposes of staff development were also discussed. Moreover, different
forms of staff development- traditional and online- were presented and specific
programs were mentioned. The characteristics of effective professional
development were thoroughly discussed to highlight their importance. The value,
effectiveness, and advantages and disadvantages of online professional
development were also explored. Furthermore, the role of educational leaders in
providing staff development was emphasized. Educational leaders are capable of
promoting quality professional development, which makes all the difference
needed for school reform to occur. It is imperative for educational leaders to truly
understand the needs of their K-12 teachers and students to provide effective
professional development.
The following chapter will provide detailed information about the research
design- the sample, instrumentation and data analysis- pertaining to this specific
study.
62
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Research Overview
In this chapter, the researcher presents a detailed explanation of the
research design followed by description of the sample. An explanation of the
development and usage of the survey instrument are also presented. Further, the
procedures that were followed throughout the research study and the analysis of
the data are described.
The researcher gathered both quantitative and qualitative data for this
comparative study. Mississippi K-12 teachers who reported they have
participated in at least one professional development program were asked to fill
out a survey instrument (questionnaire) designed specifically for this study (see
Appendix A). The questionnaire included questions pertaining to the participants’
attitudes toward the training they received. They were asked about the
importance and usefulness of the skills they learned in face-to-face and online
training. They were also asked about the knowledge and benefit they derived.
The participants’ responses were analyzed to determine if statistical differences
existed in teachers’ attitudes toward online professional development as opposed
to traditional face-to-face staff development.
The participants were also asked about the helpfulness of the instructor of
the professional training they participated in. In addition, they were asked to rate
the support, guidance, and feedback they have received. Those data were used
to measure if statistical differences existed between teachers’ perceived level of
63
support for online professional development as opposed to traditional face-to-
face professional development.
Moreover, the participants were asked questions about how comfortable
they felt when integrating technology into their instruction. They were also asked
about their use of the Internet as part of their teaching methodology and if they
encouraged their students to use the Internet too. Teachers’ responses to these
questions were explored to study their attitudes toward utilizing technology as an
instructional tool in their classes after they have participated in at least one online
professional development module. K-12 teachers from nine different public
school districts in Mississippi were polled.
Sample
The researcher surveyed K-12 teachers in Mississippi based on the
following factors: number of districts and the district location and size. Surveying
teachers in only one district would not have yielded an adequate sample size. In
addition, it would not have been a representation of districts across the sate.
Therefore, for the purposes of this specific study, nine districts were chosen. The
researcher targeted teachers from districts which are located in the four
quadrates (Northeast, Northwest, Southeast, and Southwest) of Mississippi to
help ensure a sample likely to be representative of the entire state K-12 teacher
population. Some districts were relatively small; others were considered large.
Out of the 1,000 surveyed teachers, 312 chose to fill out the survey
instruments and return them to the researcher. The sample included male and
female teachers of various ethnic backgrounds. Their ages were typical of K-12
64
classroom teachers; they ranged from 20 to over 60 years. The sample included
novice teachers as well as veterans.
Instrumentation
The researcher developed a survey instrument (questionnaire) to be
utilized for gathering the needed data for this specific study. The questionnaire
was prepared with the help of a focus group. The researcher met with a panel of
experts (K-12 teachers, administrators, and professional development
coordinators) and asked them to assist in forming the new survey instrument.
This instrument was designed to measure teachers’ attitudes toward online
professional development as opposed to traditional professional development.
The questionnaire was also used to measure K-12 teachers’ perceived support in
traditional face-to-face professional training as compared to online training. In
addition, the instrument measured teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing technology
in their classes as an instructional tool after participating in at least one online
professional development module.
After several meetings with the group of experts, the researcher
developed the final draft of the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The survey
instrument contained demographic questions, 43 “Likert-type” scale items, and
five open-ended questions. The panel of experts helped the researcher
determine the construct and face validity of the questionnaire by examining the
coherence, clarity, obviousness, and readability level of the items. Upon
receiving permission from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) found in Appendix
B, the researcher tested the reliability of the survey instrument in the pilot study.
65
The researcher had a sample of 25 K-12 teachers complete the questionnaire
based on their experiences with professional development. Cronboch Alpha was
used to measure internal consistency; its value was .94, indicating high reliability.
Procedures
Nine school district officials, professional development coordinators, and
superintendents across the state of Mississippi were contacted. The researcher
asked their permission to have their K-12 teachers complete the survey
instrument. Some of these educational experts were contacted via the phone,
while others were emailed. The researcher explained via the phone calls and the
emails the importance of the study and the purpose behind it. The researcher
also elucidated the significance of the questionnaire and the importance of it
being completed by the teachers and returned on time. The researcher also
asked each superintendent to sign a permission letter for data collection from
each specific district (see Appendix C).
After the research project was approved by the IRB, the survey
instruments were mailed. The researcher attached a letter to each questionnaire
to encourage teachers to fill out the questionnaires and return them within two
weeks (see Appendix D). The researcher also provided self-addressed
envelopes so teachers could mail the survey instruments back. The researcher
mailed the questionnaires to the superintendents who gave them to the
principals. The principals then distributed them to the teachers. Participating
teachers were asked questions related to their gender, age, years of experience,
and computer knowledge. They were also asked about their attitudes toward
66
traditional face-to-face professional development and online professional
development. Furthermore, teachers answered questions pertaining to their
computer skills, technology integration, and the support they have received
during professional training. After the questionnaires were returned to the
researcher, data were gathered and analyzed.
Data Analysis
The researcher collected the data and used the 13th version of the
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences- SPSS (Norusis, 2005) for data
analysis. Both factor analysis (for determining the number of constructs being
measured) and paired-samples t-tests were used to address the research
questions that follow.
Research Question 1
Is there a statistically significant difference between K-12 teachers’
attitudes toward online professional development and their attitudes toward
traditional face-to-face professional development?
Method of Data Analysis for Research Question 1. A paired-samples t-test was
conducted. The factors “PD” and “OPD” were used as measures for teachers’
attitudes toward face-to-face professional development and online professional
development respectively. The alpha value was set at .05.
Research Question 2
perceived level of support in online professional development and their perceived
level of support in traditional face-to-face professional development?
67
conducted. The factors “SupportPD” and “SupportOPD” were used as measures
for teachers’ attitudes toward the support they received in face-to-face
professional development and the support they received in online professional
development consecutively. The alpha value was set at .05.
Research Question 3
attitudes toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms
before and their attitudes after participating in online professional training?
conducted. The factors “TechBefore” and “TechAfter” were used as measures for
teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their
classrooms before participating in online professional training and utilizing
technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms after participating in online
professional training consecutively. The alpha value was set at .05.
68
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF DATA
Introduction
This chapter is dedicated to reporting the analysis of the data gathered in
this research study. The researcher sun/eyed K-12 teachers who have
participated in at least one professional development program to examine their
attitudes toward online and face-to-face professional development. The study
focused on K-12 teachers who teach in public schools in the state of Mississippi.
Nine different school districts across the state were chosen for this study.
Quantitative and qualitative data were gathered to determine if there was a
statistically significant difference in teachers’ attitudes toward online and face-to-
face professional training. Teachers’ attitudes toward the support they have
received in online and face-to-face professional training and their attitudes
toward utilizing technology in their classrooms were also measured.
Data Collection
A total of 1,000 questionnaires were mailed to nine districts’
superintendents who delivered them to the principals of 31 public schools. The
principals distributed the questionnaires to K-12 teachers. The teachers were
invited to fill out the questionnaires and return them within two weeks. The
questionnaires that were mailed back to the researcher within a period of four
weeks were used in this specific study.
69
Description of Sample
The population for this research study consisted of 1,000 teachers who
teach in nine public school districts in Mississippi. Out of the 1,000 surveyed, 312
completed the questionnaires and mailed them back to the researcher (31.2%
response rate). Demographics are presented in Table 1. Out of the 312 teachers,
only 101 reported having participated in at least one online professional
development activity (32.4%). A graph of the sub-sample is presented (Figure 1).
I ' i
_ DESOTO { BENTON S ALCORN
‘ "l
„ _ j Ma r s h a l l ! i
J/'X TIPPAH
T A Tr PRENTISS
• T U N IC A
i' V 1 i U N IO N i
I___
! I
i | P A N O LA | LA F A Y E TT E - — ......
O JC O A H O M A
‘ l' i i
■PON r O T O f -l
LEE
u u iim a n l
1. . . . ' [A i.t.A rtA 1 C H Ih

IY A L O B U S H A
\ T
CALHOUN;^,^^
•JO LIVIR
GRENADA
r* r ---------
T , , ............ 1 | CLAY
i t i W t-K S lc - R I
LEFLORE % I
1 - ■ ■
r ! r ! ; a 'IH B E H A 1. O W H D E S jf
CARROLL ^ jc H O C T A W ! J
' 'I .*«*• ■1.*. i J-* I i
* r l --------i ‘--------- r --------- 1
' ■
C > r * ' ^ h o lm e s 5 A TT A LA IJ
! I NOXUBEE
i W IN S T O N
j / !
{
... /
IJr woo ,
- - f ■■■lltBlllllillM
LE A K F I NESHOBA KFM PER
L * *ll iiA O L E N A
■' .. ..
" > t --
M A D IS O N t. -f'
i
l A ll DfcRUAl Ei'
f
> i gf I SCOT” ■ NEW TON
W ARREN, i >
I A* , ,
H IN D S .■3 R A N K IN
«.
{ ). ; - i ........
SWIP I JA SFER i CLARKE I
: f
X'
Cl A UO HM - 1 UNrf
.S IM P S O J [ ■ i
N =7Jl I i
f. i ..... -J-—--(
.f - JEFFERSO N ;--------
lO'OYI N G TO N I
f\. I * - •* i !«*■.. I JO N E S W A YN F !
I
1
j - H
i L IN C O L N
V iS l l i- H
I ADAMS F R A N K L IN I \
> ‘ V v ; N =95
•'a'* ! I F O R R t S l)
- - L ,,- --T ■* T
1 M A R IO N | l a m a R J S P H RR Y , CiH EEN E
W IL K IN S O N | A M ir E i P,K E ; ■:_, !
\
_________________ _ i W A LTHALL j I
’1
f
f PEARL
R IV E R I STONE r1 ORGE
' N = 6 8 ! JA C K S O N
r o iR F iS O T r j
■H ftN C i
\
< -S '
71
Table 1
Demographic Characteristics of Sample (N=312)
Characteristics Frequency Percent
Gender
Female 271 86.9%

Male 35 11 .2 %
(Missing) 1.9%
Age
20-30 years 81 26.0%

31-40 years 75 24.0%
41-50 years 69 2 2 . 1%
51-60 years 72 23.1%
60+ years 10 3.2%
(Missing) 1.6%
Ethnicity
White 217 69.6%

Asian 5 1 .6 %
Black, African Descent 64 20.9%
Black, not African Descent 17 5.6%
Native American 2 .7%
Other 1 .3%
(Missing) 1.3%
Grade Level Taught
K-3 96 30.8%
4-5 43 13.8%
6-8 85 27.2%
K-8 15 4.8%
6-12 3 1 .0 %
9-12 59 18.9%
(Missing) 3.5%
72
250-
200-
150 —
4-»
c
3
O
o
100—
50-
No Yes
Have Participated in OPD
Figure 1. Teacher Participation in Online Professional Development (OPD).
Data Preparation
Before gathering data, the researcher established the validity and
reliability of the research instrument based on the input provided by the panel of
experts in the focus group and the Cronbach Alpha value of the pilot study. After
the data was gathered, the researcher rechecked the validity and reliability of the
survey instrument by using factor analysis and Cronbach Alpha. Prior to the
analyses, all items related to professional development (Q17- Q55) were factor
analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (PCA Varimax Rotation) to verify that
specific items correlated to each other and measured a specific construct which
allowed conclusions regarding the validity of the instrument. The rotated solution
confirmed that there were six factors, which together accounted for 78.07% of the
variance: PD, OPD, SupportPD, SupportOPD, TechBefore, and TechAfter. The
breakdown of items into factors and the factor loadings are shown in Table 2.
Only 2 items (Q17 & Q18) were removed because they double loaded.
Subsequent analyses used the six factors as dependent variables.
74
Table 2
Factor Loadings
Factor Item Description Loadings
PD
*
Q19 Satisfaction with district’s current PD program
Q23 Importance of PDA .791
Q24 Usefulness of PDA .825
Q25 Benefit received from PDA .801
Q26 Knowledge received from PDA .854
Q27 Confidence in skills learned in PDA .841
Q32 Usability of skills after PDA .848
OPD
Q39 Importance of OPDA .822

Q40 Usefulness of OPDA .809
Q41 Benefit received from OPDA .780
Q42 Knowledge received from OPDA .765
Q43 Confidence in skills learned in OPDA .723
*
Q54 Usability of skills after OPDA
*
Q55 Satisfaction with district’s current OPD
program
SupportPD
Q28 Helpfulness of instructor of PDA .793

Q29 Feedback received during PDA .804
Q30 Feedback received after PDA .619
Q31 Support & guidance received during PDA .876
75
Table 2 (continued).
Factor Item Description Loadings
SupportOPD
Q44 Helpfulness of instructor of OPDA .738
Q45 Feedback received during OPDA .811
Q46 Feedback received after OPDA .805
Q47 Support & guidance received during OPDA .774
TechBefore
Q48 Integrating technology into instruction before .745
OPDA
Q50 Use of Internet in teaching method before .442
OPDA
Q52 Number of assignments using Internet .855
before OPDA
Tech After
Q49 Integrating technology into instruction after .621
OPDA
Q51 Use of Internet in teaching method after .638
OPDA
*
Q53 Number of assignments using Internet after
OPDA
* These items were included in the factors above although their factor loadings were higher on
other factors (not shown).
76
The original intent of the researcher was to develop a questionnaire that
would specifically measure variables as they relate to the research questions
presented in this study. Based on that, the researcher decided that four items
(Q19, Q53, Q54, & Q55) would be parts of certain factors (see Table 2) although
their factor loadings indicated otherwise. This strategy is justified by the high
Cronbach Alpha statistics reported once the items were moved to other factors
(see Table 3).
To establish reliability, an internal consistency estimate of reliability was
measured using the Cronbach Alpha. The variables used to determine reliability
of the survey instrument are reported in Appendix F. The researcher also tested
each of the six factors for reliability. The Cronbach Alpha statistics of these
factors were all larger than .70 indicating satisfactory reliability. Cronbach Alpha
values of all factors are reported in Table 3.
Table 3
Summary of the Cronbach Alpha Statistics of the Six Factors
Factors________ Number of Items_______Cronbach Alpha
PD 7 .83
OPD 7 .91
SupportPD 4 .93
SupportOPD 4 .93
TechBefore 3 .77
Tech After 3 .81
The participants who indicated that they had participated in online
professional development (N=101) were also asked a question regarding
whether they preferred online or face-to-face training. Out of the 101 teachers, 65
said they preferred face-to-face training, 30 reported they preferred online
training, and 5 had no preference (see Figure 2).
70-
60-
50-
20-
10-
I l
Face-to-face Online Either
Preference
Figure 2. Teachers’ Preference for Professional Development
78
When asked if they would consider participating in additional online
professional development activities, 78 teachers said yes and 22 teachers said
no (see Figure 3). These two questions were followed by the opportunity for
teachers to elaborate by answering four open-ended questions.
80-
60-
20-
I
No Yes
Consider Participating in More Online Professional Training
Figure 3. Teachers’ Willingness to Participate in More Online Professional

Training.
79
When reporting the suggestions teachers gave on how to improve online
professional development, the researcher found four themes: instruction, the
instructor, teacher involvement and relevance, and variety. Teacher involvement
and relevance-related issues (N=25) were more frequently mentioned than
others. Participants suggested that teachers should be actively involved in the
planning of online professional development, and that it should be relevant,
useful and based on teachers’ needs. The issues related to instruction (N=15)
showed that teachers needed the online activities to be shorter and simpler. They
also suggested that they should be given more time at school for online training.
The issues related to the instructor (N=7) suggested that more feedback and
easier access to the instructor were needed. Moreover, the issues related to
variety (N=7) showed that teachers suggested that more online workshops and a
wider variety of online activities should be provided.
When reporting which aspects of online professional development proved
to be most effective to the participants, the researcher found three themes:
convenience, interactivity, and construct. Interactivity related issues (N=12) were
more frequently mentioned than others. Teachers reported that the live chatting,
live discussions, conference calls, and visuals helped them interact with the
instructor and other teachers. This aspect proved helpful to some participants.
The themes related to convenience (N=9) showed that teachers reported the
effectiveness of working at one’s own pace without any time frames. They also
reported that access and availability of online activities were two characteristics
that made them look forward to participating in more online professional training.
80
Furthermore, the issues related to the construct (N=8) showed that the way the
online professional development activities were structured had an effect on their
value. The participants reported that they found outcome-based activities and
technology training workshops to be very helpful. They also reported the value of
activities that provided useful teaching strategies.
When reporting which aspects of online professional development proved
to be least effective to the participants, the researcher found three themes:
feedback and support, hands-on, and difficulties. The feedback and support-
related issues (N=10) were more frequently mentioned than others. Teachers
stated that the online learning they participated lacked sufficient feedback. They
did not receive all the help and support they needed throughout their online
training. The hands-on-related issues (N=8) reflected teachers’ need for more
interactive activities. Teachers reported that the lack of hands-on activities and
visuals was a drawback of the online training they received. They thought such
interactive activities and visuals should replace the lengthy chats they
participated in. The difficulty related issues (N=7) showed that some participants
found unclear directions, difficult tests, hard materials, and technical difficulties to
be aspects that hindered their learning. In addition, they reported that limited
access to computers and the Internet at their schools caused problems, too.
When asked if professional development could be done solely online, 14
teachers said yes, and 77 said no. When reporting qualitative data, the
researcher found two themes for the teachers who said yes: convenience and
accessibility and training and two themes for those who said no: teachers’ needs
81
and face-to-face components. For the teachers who affirmed that professional
development could be done solely online, the convenience and accessibility
related issues (N=9) were more frequently mentioned than others. Some
participants believed that online professional training could substitute for face-to-
face staff development because online activities save time. They also reported
that all public schools have computers and Internet access which makes it easy
for a large number of teachers to be trained at the same time. The training
related issues (ISM) showed that some participants believed that with the proper
training and support all teachers could benefit from online professional
development. For the teachers who thought professional development should be
a mixture of online and face-to-face training, the face-to-face component related
issues (N=57) were the most frequently mentioned. The majority of the
participants believed that a face-to-face component should accompany online
professional training for learning to take place. Teachers reported the need for
human interaction, instant feedback, active participation, hands-on activities, and
visuals. The issues related to teachers’ needs (N= 14) showed that some
participants believed that online learning does not suit all teachers. A mixture of
face-to-face is needed to meet the needs of individual teachers.
A summary of the qualitative data collected from these questions is
reported in Appendix E.
Analysis of Research Questions
The researcher based this study on three research questions related to K-
12 teachers’ attitudes toward professional development. The first question
82
measured teachers’ attitudes toward online and face-to-face professional
training. The second question measured the perceived support teachers received
during and after online and face-to-face professional development. The third
question measured teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing technology as an
instructional tool in their classes after participating in online professional training.
Research Question 1
attitudes toward online professional development and their attitudes toward
traditional face-to-face professional development?
Procedures and Results
The teachers were asked several questions related to their attitudes
toward online and face-to-face professional development. The researcher
combined several items based on the factor analysis and used the factor “PD”
and the factor “OPD” to address this question. The factors are identified in Table
2.
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine if a statistically
significant difference existed between K-12 teachers’ attitudes toward online
professional development and their attitudes toward face-to-face professional
development. For the purpose of this analysis, all the items comprising the factor
“PD” were summed to use as a measure of teachers’ attitudes toward face-to-
face professional development, whereas all the items comprising the factor
“OPD” were summed to use as the measure of teachers’ attitudes toward online
professional development. A statistically significant difference was found f(1,90)=
83
2.70, p=.008. The mean of teachers’ attitudes toward face-to-face professional
development was statistically significantly more positive than the mean of
teachers’ attitudes toward online professional development. The means and
standard deviations are reported in Table 4.
Table 4
Summary of Means and Standard Deviations for the Three Research Questions
Research Questions Mean Standard N

Deviation
Research Question 1
PD 3.50 .72 101

OPD 3.30 .77 101
Research Question2
SupportPD 3.38 .69 99

SupportOPD 3.07 .88 99
Research Question3
Tech Before 2.98 .87 101

TechAfter 3.21 .86 101
Research Question 2
perceived level of support in online professional development and their perceived
level of support in traditional face-to-face professional development?
84
The teachers were asked several questions related to their level of
perceived support in online professional development as opposed to traditional
professional development. The researcher combined several items based on the
factor analysis and used the factor “SupportPD” and the factor “SupportOPD” to
address this question. The factors are identified in Table 2.
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine if there was a
statistically significant difference between K-12 teachers’ level of perceived
support in online professional development and their level of perceived support in
face-to-face professional development. For the purpose of this analysis, all the
items comprising the factor “SupportPD” were summed to use as a measure of
teachers’ level of perceived support in face-to-face professional development,
whereas all the items comprising the factor “SupportOPD” were summed to use
as the measure of teachers’ level of perceived support in online professional
development. A statistically significant difference was found f(1,95)= 3.43,
p=.001. The mean of teachers’ level of perceived support in face-to-face
professional development was statistically significantly higher than the mean of
teachers’ level of perceived support in online professional development (Table 4).
Research Question 3
attitudes toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms
before and their attitudes after participating in online professional training?
85
The teachers were asked several questions related to their attitudes
toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms before as
opposed to after participating in online professional training. The researcher
combined several items based on the factor analysis and used the factor
“TechBefore” and the factor “TechAfter” to address this question. The factors are
identified in Table 2.
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to determine if a statistically
significant difference existed between K-12 teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing
technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms before participating in
online professional training and their attitudes toward utilizing technology as an
instructional tool in their classrooms after participating in online professional
training. For the purpose of this analysis, all the items comprising the factor
“TechBefore” were summed to use as a measure of teachers’ attitudes toward
utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms before
participating in online professional training, whereas all the items comprising the
factor “TechAfter” were summed to use as the measure of teachers’ attitudes
toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms after
participating in online professional training. A statistically significant difference
was found t{1,95)= -4.28, p=.001. The mean of teachers’ reported comfort and
use of technology as an instructional tool in their classrooms after participating in
online professional training was statistically significantly higher than the mean of
86
teachers’ reported comfort and use of technology as an instructional tool in their
classrooms before participating in online professional training (Table 4).
It might be noted that for this specific study, the researcher chose to run
the three paired-samples t-tests using the sums of the items within factors rather
than the means. Whereas this strategy may in some cases influence outcomes,
in this specific study, analyses using means resulted in identical outcomes of
significant difference for all three research questions.
Summary of Findings
The results of Research Question 1 showed that teachers’ attitudes
toward face-to-face professional development were statistically significantly more
positive than their attitudes toward online professional development. The results
of Research Question 2 showed that the teachers’ level of perceived support in
online professional training was statistically significantly lower than their level of
perceived support in face-to-face training. The results of Research Question 3
showed that teachers’ attitudes towards utilizing technology as an instructional
tool in their classes after participating in online professional development was
statistically significantly more positive than their attitudes before participating in
online professional development. In summary, all three statistical tests concluded
that statistically significant differences existed.
Ancillary Findings
After analyzing the collected data, the researcher came to the realization
that some findings- although unexpected- were worth mentioning. Based on the
data, there was a notable difference between teachers’ satisfaction with their
87
districts’ professional development programs and their districts’ online
professional development programs. Teachers were more satisfied with the face-
to-face training than the online training they received (Figure 4).
5-
4-
C
(0
0)
3-
2-
PD Satisfaction OPD Satisfaction
Figure 4. Teachers’ Satisfaction with Their Districts’ Professional Development

(PD) and Online Professional Development (OPD) Programs.
88
The data also indicated that teacher involvement in the planning of
professional development was not high. Out of the 312 surveyed teachers, 42
reported that they were not involved in the planning of professional development
(see Figure 5).
120 -
100 —
80-
c
3
o 60-
o
40-
None Low Moderate High Very High

Teacher Involvement in PD Planning
Figure 5. Teacher Involvement in the Planning of Professional Development (PD)
89
Their choice in the type of professional development they received was
also limited. Out of the 312 surveyed teachers, 54 said that they did not have any
choice in the professional training they received (see Figure 6).
100—
80-
60-
*->
C
3
O
o
40-
20-

Teacher Choice in PD Received
Figure 6. How Much Choice Teachers Have in the Professional Development

(PD) They Receive
Another interesting finding was how teachers rated the impact of the
professional development they received on their students’ achievement. The
majority of surveyed teachers (149) reported that the impact of the professional
development they received on their students’ achievement was moderate (see
Figure 7).
150 —
120—
90-
C
3
O
o
60-
30-

PD Impact on Student Achievement
Figure 7. Impact of Professional Development on Student Achievement
91
Moreover, the data showed that teachers believed that integrating
technology into instruction was of high value. Out of the 312 surveyed teachers,
133 reported that it was high, and 61 said that it was very high (Figure 8). A
discussion of all findings will follow in Chapter 5.
140 —
120 —
100 —
60-
40-
20-

Value of Technology Integration into Instruction
Figure 8. The Value of Technology Integration into Instruction
92
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
A discussion of the rationale of this specific study and its findings are
presented in this chapter; ancillary findings are also interpreted. Further,
limitations of the research study are reported. Recommendations for practice
and further research as well as implications for educational leaders are also
suggested. The researcher’s personal comments on some aspects of the study
are stated in the reflections section.
This research study was intended to explore the value of face-to-face and
online professional development from the perspective of K-12 teachers. It was
also done to show the value of support teachers received during their
professional learning as well as the value of online professional training as it
relates to technology integration into classroom instruction. The results of this
specific study could help educational leaders better plan and implement
professional development. The data also had the potential to indicate if a need
for online professional development existed.
Summary of Procedures
The researcher developed a questionnaire to be used as the survey
instrument in this specific study. The questionnaire contained demographic
questions, 43 “Likert-type” scale items, and five open-ended questions. The
survey instrument, which was based on focus group discussions and was pilot-
93
tested, was developed to assess teachers’ attitudes toward staff development,
technology integration, and online professional leaning. Once the nine
superintendents’ signatures were obtained and the Institutional Review Board’s
approval was granted, the questionnaires were mailed to the district offices. The
superintendents delivered the survey instruments to school principals who then
distributed them to individual teachers. The teachers were encouraged to fill out
the questionnaires and mail them back to the researcher in two weeks. All the
survey instruments that were gathered within the period of four weeks were
included in this study. Out of the 1,000 targeted teachers, 312 (31.2%) filled out
the questionnaires and mailed them back to the researcher. When all the data
were collected, the researcher analyzed them and reported the findings.
Limitations
The process of mailing out the survey instruments and getting them back
took more time than the researcher expected, thus the period of waiting for the
data to be gathered was extended from two weeks to four. Another limitation was
the fact that not all targeted teachers, only about one third, had participated in at
least one online professional development program. The researcher expected at
least half the teachers to have experienced online training. Many of the
participants stated that they did not have any experience with online training
because they may not have understood exactly what the researcher meant by
online professional development. Thus, several teachers might have actually
experienced online professional training but did not report that they did.
94
Summary of Major Findings
Three research questions were studied to examine teachers’ attitudes
toward online and face-to-face professional development. Each research
question and its findings are presented in this section.
Research Question 1 explored K-12 teachers’ attitudes toward
professional development. It measured the knowledge and benefit they received
from online as well as traditional face-to-face professional training. It also
measured the importance and usefulness of both kinds of training. In addition, it
measured teachers’ confidence of the skills they learned in face-to-face and
online professional development. The results suggested that there was a
statistically significant difference in teachers’ attitudes toward face-to-face and
online training. The data reported from teachers reflected that they benefited
more from face-to-face training and that they thought it was more important than
online training. The data also indicated that teachers were more confident in the
skills they learned in face-to-face training than the skills they learned in online
training (see frequencies and percentages in Appendix F).
Research Question 2 explored the support teachers received in traditional
face-to-face staff development and in online professional development. It
measured the feedback teachers were given during and after their participation in
the professional development activities. It also measured how helpful the
instructor was, as well as the amount of guidance the instructor supplied. The
results showed that a statistically significant difference existed between the
support teachers received in face-to-face training as compared to online training.
95
Teachers were given more feedback and help from face-to-face instructors. Their
leaders provided more guidance and support during traditional face-to-face staff
development than during online training (see frequencies and percentages in
Appendix F).
Research Question 3 explored teachers’ reported attitudes toward
integrating technology into their instruction before as opposed to after their
participation in online training. It measured teachers’ comfort level and reported
use of technology in their instruction before and after participating in online
professional development activities. It also measured the amount of assignments
teachers gave directing students to use the Internet before as opposed to after
participating in online training. The results suggested that there was a significant
difference between teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing technology as an
instructional tool before as opposed to after participating in online training. The
data showed that teachers were more comfortable in integrating technology into
their instruction after they participated in online professional development. The
results also reported that teachers’ use of technology in their teaching methods
and the assignments they gave directing students to use technology increased
after their participation in online training (see frequencies and percentages in
Appendix F).
Discussion
What the results of the three research questions meant, how they might
be interpreted, and whether they supported or contradicted the pertinent
literature are discussed in this section. For Research Question 1, the difference
96
the researcher found between teachers’ attitudes toward online professional
training and their attitudes toward face-to-face staff development was a statistical
difference rather than a meaningful, practical one. While the majority of the
teachers reported that online and face-to-face training were highly useful and
important, the rest of the teachers had a moderate attitude. Educational leaders
and decision makers might have failed those teachers in providing meaningful,
effective staff development. Holland (2005) explained that educational leaders
have to ensure that the professional learning teachers receive is aligned with
their everyday experiences. Despite the statistically higher rating for face-to-face
professional development, it is important to note that the surveyed teachers in
this study considered online training beneficial, too. The data indicated that the
majority of the surveyed teachers rated the benefit and degree of knowledge they
received in online training as high.
Although the difference between teachers’ attitudes toward face-to-face
staff development and their attitudes toward online training was not meaningful, it
might be the case because the majority of the surveyed teachers were digital
immigrants. These teachers are not as comfortable with technology as teachers
who are born after 1980. The difference found in Research Question 1 might also
be due to the fact that teachers received much more support, guidance, follow-up
and feedback in face-to-face professional training than they did in online
professional training. The amount of encouragement, support, and feedback
teachers received in face-to-face training affected their attitudes toward it
positively. These findings were consistent with the literature. Salpeter (2003)
97
reported that teachers consider professional development to be effective when it
involves follow-up and support. These findings also indicated that instructors and
educational leaders tend to provide more encouragement, follow-up, and
feedback to teachers during and after traditional face-to-face staff development
than they do during and after online professional development. If educational
leaders fail to realize how important online professional training is, then they are
not likely to provide their teachers with ample support. This may then influence
the teachers’ confidence levels and may affect their attitudes toward online
professional development negatively. Educational leaders play a major role in
teachers’ staff development. An integral part of this role is one of guidance and
support (Drago-Severson, 2002; Haar, 2001). Further, educational leaders are
role models who can hinder or boost their teachers’ professional learning.
Additionally, the data suggested that there was a direct positive correlation
between teachers’ online professional development and their attitudes toward
using technology in class; the more they participated in online professional
training, the more they integrated technology into their instruction, and the more
they encouraged their students to use technology as a learning tool. These
findings are consistent with the literature; for example, the results of a study that
took place in Alabama indicated that online professional development made a
difference in teachers’ use of technology (Bush, 2005). Likewise, Collins and
Dewees (2001) also reported that online professional development had a positive
effect on technology integration into classroom instruction.
98
Qualitative Findings and Discussion
In answering the open-ended questions, the participants provided some
clarifications and explanations regarding their attitudes toward online
professional development. The majority of teachers- regardless of their
preference- reported that they were willing to participate in more online
professional development training. The data indicated that most teachers liked
face-to-face professional development and thought it was beneficial, useful, and
important. When teachers were involved in high-quality professional
development, they believed it was valuable. This is supported by other research,
such as, Haar (2001) who stated that teachers benefit greatly from professional
staff development when it is of high quality.
Most teachers preferred face-to-face staff development to online training,
and age could have been a factor that affected their attitudes. The majority of
participants were 31 years old or older (see Table 1); they did not belong to the
digital generation. Participants who belonged to the first age group category (20-
30 years) were mostly digital natives. They were more tech-savvy than the rest of
the participants. This is supported by the literature; Saltpeter (2003) and Oblinger
(2003) stated that age makes a difference. Not only students, but also teachers
who are born after 1980 learn best when technology is utilized in the learning
process.
Regardless of their preferences, teachers were clear in expressing their
need for online professional training. This is consistent with what Cole and Styron
(2005) found. They reported that teachers needed “professional development
99
geared toward new technology” (p. 4). Those data also suggested that some
teachers might have had some negative experiences in the past online activities
they participated in, but they agreed with the need to keep learning online
because of its convenience.
When asked about ways to improve online professional training, about half
of the participants did not have suggestions. The teachers who gave suggestions
stressed the need for more support and feedback. They explained that the online
training they received lacked direct feedback which hindered their learning
process. They also did not receive the ample support they needed either from
their instructors or from their educational leaders. The literature summarized in
this study supports these findings. Dickenson et al. (2003) stressed that the lack
of support and guidance is one of the reasons professional training might be
ineffective.
Moreover, participants in this specific study reported that they needed
more time at school for their online training. This is consistent with the literature;
Killion (2002) stated that teachers should be given time at school to participate in
online professional development programs. In addition, some teachers
suggested the need for a wider variety of online professional development
programs. This could be interpreted as the districts’ failure in providing a variety
of online programs that target the needs of all K-12 teachers. These findings are
supported by the literature summarized in this research study. Killion stressed
that online professional development programs should offer substantial content
related to the needs of the teachers and the students.
100
When asked about the aspects of online training participants found to be
most effective, some teachers stated that they valued how convenient it was. The
pertinent literature supports that finding. Online professional development is
convenient in that it can be done anytime anyplace (Barkley & Bianco, 2002;
Killion, 2000; McKenzie, 1998). Other teachers liked the fact that they could work
at their own pace. Several studies have reported similar conclusions that online
professional development allows teachers the freedom to learn at their own pace
(Barkley & Bianco, 2002; Killion, 2000; McKenzie, 1998). The data also
suggested that some participants found that interactivity of online training was
very helpful. Research by Killion and Oelrich (2001) supports this finding; they
stated that when teachers participate in online professional training, they can
interact and learn from teachers at schools around the nation. Furthermore, Adsit
(2004) reported that online training diminishes teacher seclusion and increases
collegiality.
When asked about the aspects of online training that proved to be least
effective, some participants referred to the lack of support and feedback. As
mentioned earlier, this finding is supported in more than one instance in the
literature. Other teachers stated that the lack of hands-on activities was one of
the aspects that hindered their learning. This is supported by other research; as
Killion (2002) reported, many teachers drop out of online training because of its
lack of interactivity.
In addition, when asked if professional development could be done solely
online, most teachers had negative replies. The majority of the teachers who
101
answered this open-ended question agreed that professional development
should be a combination of face-to-face and online training. This is supported by
studies by Zenger and Uehlein (2001) and Burke (1994) who agree that staff
development should be a mixture of both face-to-face and online professional
training.
Ancillary Findings and Discussion
A discussion of some unexpected findings that were worth mentioning is
presented in this section. The data suggested that a notable difference existed
between teachers’ satisfaction with their districts’ professional development
programs and their districts’ online professional development programs.
Teachers reported that they were more satisfied with the traditional face-to-face
training they received than the online training they received. These results might
suggest that the face-to-face staff development teachers received better reflected
their individual needs more so than the online professional training. Salpeter
(2003) affirmed that while staff development should focus on the real needs of
teachers and students, online professional training should focus on the real uses
of technology. Teachers might be more satisfied with online professional
development if it addressed their needs.
The data also indicated that teacher involvement in the planning of
professional development was limited. Their choice in the type of professional
development they received was also minimal. The researcher found those
specific findings to be intriguing because they might be the reasons behind
teachers’ attitudes toward their professional learning. For teachers to be content
102
with their own professional learning, they should be actively involved in its
preparation and implementation. These findings are consistent with the literature.
When teachers have more control over the type, planning and implementation of
the professional development they receive, they are more satisfied with it (Linek
et al., 2003). Dickenson et al. (2003) also reported that teacher input is a central
factor for effective professional development. Moreover, the research findings of
Barnett (2004) indicated that teachers thought the professional development they
received was effective because they were actively involved in its planning,
implementation, and evaluation.
The data suggested that teachers did not really see the connection
between professional development and student achievement. This is not
consistent with the literature. Linek et al. (2003) indicated that professional
development is an effective way to enhance student achievement. However, the
findings of this specific research study could also be interpreted from another
angle. If the professional development teachers participated in was not effective,
then its impact on student performance would not be very evident. This is
consistent with the literature; as Berry, Hoke, and Hirsch (2004) and Reid (2002)
affirmed that student achievement is highly affected by teacher professional
learning; the more effective professional development is the greater impact it has
on student achievement.
Teachers should have a choice in whether they want to participate in
online professional training and, if they do, they should be able to choose the
kind of online learning they feel more comfortable with. Johnson et al. (2001)
103
reported that teachers are either positively or negatively affected by the
professional training they receive. According to NPEAT (1999), teachers should
be able to identify what they want to learn and what kind of experiences they
want to engage in. Moreover, the data showed that teachers believed that
integrating technology into instruction was of high value. This is supported by
what Cole and Styron (2005) found. The data also indicated that K-12 teachers
not only understand the value of utilizing technology in their instruction, but are
also willing to do it. For them to be able to do so, they should be well trained.
Collins and Dewees (2001) stated that online professional development provides
such training and helps teachers utilize technology into their classes.
Recommendations for Policy and Practice
The data from this particular study indicated that K-12 teachers knew the
value of professional development. They benefited from the face-to-face training
they received. The findings also suggested that a lot of teachers valued online
professional training and were willing to participate in more online activities.
Further, the data indicated that the majority of teachers integrated more
technology into their instruction after participating in online professional
development. The results also suggested to professional development
coordinators the need for providing a wider variety of online professional
development activities. In addition, the data indicated that more teachers would
be willing to participate in online professional if it were relevant and directly
related to their needs. Professional development coordinators should also make
sure that online instructors provide ample feedback to teachers during and after
104
online training. Moreover, the data were clear in suggesting that there was a
need for professional development coordinators to involve teachers in the
planning and implementation of the online professional development programs.
This study indicated that the more choice teachers have in the professional
development they receive, the more satisfied they will be, thus, the more likely
they and their students will benefit.
Implications for the Educational Leader
A poem by the French poet Guillaume Apollinaire illustrates how
educational leaders should promote professional staff development; it reads:
COME TO THE EDGE
“Come to the edge, ” he said.
They said, “We are afraid.”
“Come to the edge, ” he said.
They came.
He pushed them.
And they flew. (Kleyn-Kennedy, 2006, p. 2)
The data and findings presented in this particular study could be of
considerable use to principals, superintendents, and staff development
coordinators. Educational leaders could use the information gathered and
analyzed in this study to improve professional development programs at their
own educational institutions. The results of this study suggest the need for
principals to dedicate time during the school day for teachers to participate in
online professional development. Surveyed teachers said that they liked online
105
training because of its convenience; nonetheless, they reported that they needed
more time at school to participate in online learning. The most plausible reason
for that request is that a lot of teachers may not have access to computers and
the Internet at their homes. Therefore, educational leaders should provide
teachers with greater access to their technology and give them the chance to do
their online training at school.
Further, the information gathered in this study suggested that for
professional development (online and face-to-face) to have a positive impact on
student achievement it has to be of high quality. The data also indicated that the
more involved teachers are in their professional training the more effective it is.
Therefore, educational leaders have to connect with K-12 teachers and pay a
close attention to their needs. Teachers need to be assured that their input
regarding professional training is valued. Principals and superintendents should
acknowledge that teacher involvement would lead to high-quality, effective staff
development which would lead to greater improvements in student achievement.
The data collected and analyzed in this research study could also be used
to reflect the value of face-to-face professional development. Decision makers
have to keep in mind that even though some teachers like online training, others
favor traditional face-to-face staff development and feel strongly about it. The
majority of surveyed teachers believed that professional development should be
a combination of face-to-face and online learning. High-quality professional
development should address the needs of these teachers as well. Therefore,
principals and superintendents could utilize the data gathered in this study and
106
present their teachers with professional development training that includes face-
to-face and online components.
Based on the data collected in this particular study, educational leaders
need to offer a variety of online training experiences that enrich teachers’
technology-based backgrounds, empower them to utilize technology in their
instruction, and help them encourage students to use technology as a learning
tool. Therefore, educational leaders have to ensure that not only their teachers,
but also their students are utilizing technology for academic purposes.
The results of the study also indicated that some teachers not only
preferred online training, but also were willing to be trained solely online.
Educational leaders need to be conscious of the individual teachers who are
Digital Natives. Although such teachers were a minority in this particular study,
they did exist. Principals and superintendents have to make sure that the
professional development programs they implement cater to the needs of the
Digital Native teachers and students. Digital Natives, as mentioned in Chapters 1
and 2, are people who were born after 1980. They rely primarily on their visual
sense when collecting data, and they learn best when technology is implemented
into their learning activities (Oblinger, 2003).
“Our students today are all ‘native speakers’ of the digital language of
computers, video games, and the Internet.” (Prensky, 2001, p. 1). By
implementing online professional training, educational leaders are not only giving
Digital Native teachers exactly what they need, but they are also supplying Digital
Immigrant teachers (born before 1980) with the equipment and tools they need to
107
connect to their Digital Native students. Today, technology is no longer a fancy
tool that is only used by a few; it is an essential component of students’ everyday
life. “Digital tools are like extensions to students’ brains.” (Prensky, 2006, p. 11).
Decision makers have to consider these aforementioned statements when
planning effective, meaningful professional development activities.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study targeted K-12 teachers in nine public school districts in a
southeastern state. More research studies could be conducted in all the districts
in the state or even across the nation because online professional training is
taking place in all fifty states. The number of participants that formed the sample
size was relatively small; other research studies could be conducted with bigger
samples. The findings of this particular study lead to the following
recommendations for future research:
• A mixed-design study of teachers’ attitudes toward face-to-face and
online professional development controlling for age and other factors
should be conducted to examine the effects age and other factors have
on how teachers perceive their professional training.
• A qualitative study of teachers’ attitudes toward the professional
development training they are getting should be conducted to examine
what teachers consider to be most and least valuable and why.
• A qualitative study of the level of teacher involvement in professional
development should be conducted to measure how involved teachers
are and the reasons behind their involvement or lack of involvement.
108
• A qualitative study of why teachers prefer face-to-face or online method
of delivery should be conducted to determine the reasons teachers feel
a certain way after they participate in professional training.
• A research study of principals’, professional development coordinators’,
and superintendents’ attitudes toward professional development
training of K-12 teachers should be conducted.
• A research study comparing teachers’ attitudes toward the same
professional development activity taught online and face-to-face should
be conducted to see if the delivery method makes a difference.
• A research study of students’ achievement as it relates to professional
development should be examined to show if the delivery method of the
professional training makes a difference.
• A qualitative research study should be conducted to examine the
reasons behind the lack of ample support K-12 teachers are receiving
during and after online training.
• A qualitative study should examine why some teachers are not willing
to utilize technology as an instructional tool in their classes.
During the past decade, more and more technology has been implemented
and utilized in schools. The need for online professional development is
increasing. Therefore, more quantitative and qualitative research studies that
examine how teachers, principals, and superintendents feel about online
professional development should be conducted. Prior to these studies, the
109
researchers should define online professional development in clear terms so
participants would know what counts as online learning and what does not.
Reflections
This section is intended for the researcher to reflect on the dissertation
process as a whole. It was a journey full of rich learning experiences. The
researcher gained a vast amount of knowledge throughout the study from day
one of thinking about the research topic to the last day of printing the final draft.
Some of the experience led the researcher to form specific opinions and
judgments. A series of incidents were very intriguing, they led the researcher to
think deeply about the educational system in Mississippi. The researcher
contacted about a 100 districts via e-mail and telephone and explained the value
of the research project and what it was all about; only a few replied. Out of the
few that replied, only (9) approved the study.
The researcher assumed that because the majority of the superintendents
who were contacted were Ph.D. holders that they would understand the value of
research and the positive impact such a study could have on their schools. To
the researcher’s shock, that was not true. The researcher was stunned by the
replies some superintendents had and the remarks they made. It was obvious
that a number of these educational leaders did not believe in the significance of
research; some of them were so frightened that the researcher would discover
something that was taking place in their districts that they did not want to “reveal”
to the world. What message do such behaviors convey? If educational leaders do
not believe in the value of research, then how could they engage themselves and
110
their teachers in research-base, high-quality professional development? If
educational leaders have such passive attitudes toward research related to
professional learning and technology, then how do they expect their schools to
improve? Do those principals and superintendents think they are doing
everything the “right” way and their teachers and schools are just “perfect” the
way they are? What educational benefit comes from such attitudes? Educational
leaders have to support research projects, especially ones that target
professional development, if they want their schools to perform at a higher level.
Ill
APPENDIX A
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SURVEY
D em ographics
1. Gender: □ Female □ Male
2. Age: □ 20-30 □ 31-40 □ 41-50 □ 51-60 D over 60
3. Ethnicity: □ White □ Asian □ Black, of African descent
□ Black, not of African descent □ Hispanic □ Native American □ Other
4. What grade level do you currently teach?
□ K-3 □ 4-5 □ 6-8 □ 9-12
5. Current content area:_____ ________________________
6. How many years of teaching experience do you have? ______________________
7. What is the county location of your school? ______________________
8. How would you rate your computer skill level?

□ novice □ good □ very good □ expert
9. How often do you access e-mail?

□ hardly ever □ weekly □ several times a week □ daily
□ several times a day
Please respond to the following questions based on your experience in formal

professional development (PD): conferences, workshops, training, mentoring,
courses, co-teaching, coaching, institutes, academies, continuing education
credits, and other similar activities regardless of format (online or face-to-face).
10. How important do you think professional development (PD ) is?

□ not important □ somewhat important □ important □ very important
11. How important do you think PD is according to your principal?

□ not important □ somewhat important □ important □ very important
12. Does your district offer online PD?

□ yes □ no □ I do not know
13. Is P D for teachers part of your school improvement plan?

□ yes □ no □ I do not know
14. Approximately how many PD activities have you participated in during your career?
O ver
>=>
112
15. How many PD activities have you participated in during the past 12 months?
□ one □ 2-3 □ 4-5 □ 6-7 □ 8-9 □ more than 9
16. How much time have you spent on PD during the past 12 months?
□ 8 hours or less □ 9-16 hours □ 17-32 hours □ 33 hours or more
moderate
not at all
none or
Based on the experience you had in
very
high
high
Low
professional development (PD), how would you
rate the following?
17. PD impact on your student achievement. □ □ □ □
18. PD impact on your teaching practices. □ □ □ □ □

19. Your satisfaction with your district’ s current PD
program. □ □ ; ■; □
20. Teachers’ involvement in PD planning. □ □ □ □ □
21. The choice you have in the type o f PD you receive. □ □ □ □
22. The value o f integrating technology into

instruction. □ □ □ □ □
PDA: Face-to-Face Professional Development Face-to-face PD

Activity(ies)
moderate
not at all
none or
Based on the experience vou had in face-to-face
high
high
very
is
PDA, how would you rate the following? JO
23. The importance olYhe PDA. □ □

□ - :. W '
24. The usefulness o f the PDA. □ □ □ □ □
25. The benefit you received from the PDA. □ □ □ □
26. The degree o f knowledge you received from the

PDA. □ □ □ □ □
27. Your confidence in the skills vou learned in the

□ □ □ □
PDA.
28. The helpfulness o f the instructor o f the PDA. □ □ □ □ □
29. The feedback you received during the PDA. □ □ □
30. The feedback you received after the PDA. □ □ □ □ □
31. The support and guidance you received during

the PDA. □ □ o □
32. The usability o f the skills after the PDA. □ □ □ □ □
C on tinue
113
moderate
excellent
does not
apply
Based on the experience you had, how would
good
poor
vou rate the following face-to-face PDA?
33. University courses. □ □ □ " £ £ U ■; □
34. Workshops. □ □ □ □ □
3 5 . C o nferences. □ □ □ ■ M 7
36. Mentoring programs. □ □ □ □ □
3 7 . Institutes o r A cadem ics. □ □ □
38. Professional learning communities. □ □ □ □ □
If you have not participated in online professional development, please STOP here
and return questionnaire. Thank You!
OPDA: Online Professional Development Online PD

Activity(ies)
moderate
not at all
none or
Based on the experience vou had in online
very
high
high
PDA, how would you rate the following? £
39. The importance o f the OPDA. □ □ □ □
40. The usefulness o f the OPDA. □ □ □ □ □
41. The benefit you received from the OPDA. □ □ □ 77t i : - : □

42. The degree o f knowledge you received from the
OPDA. □ □ □ □ □
43. Your confidence in the skills vou learned in the
OPDA. □ □ □ :S "Q ;V ■ ' □
44. The helpfulness o f the instructor o f the OPDA. □ □ □ □ □
45. The feedback vou received during the OPDA. □ □ n

46. The feedback you received after the OPDA. □ □ □ □ □
47. The support and guidance you received during
the OPDA. □ □ □ : B 'r
48. Your comfort level in integrating technology into
your instruction before participating in OPDA. □ □ □ □ □
49. Your comfort level in integrating technology into
your instruction after participating in OPDA. □ □ □ □ □ ;
50. Your use o f the Internet as part o f your teaching
method before participating in the OPDA. □ □ □ □ □
O ver
114
51. Your use o f (lie Internet as part o f your teaching

method after participating in the OPDA. □ □ □ □ a
52. The number of assignments you gave directing
students to research via the Internet before you □ □ □ □ □
participated in OPDA.
55. The number of assignments you gave directing
students to research via the Internet after you □ □ □
participated in OPDA.
54. The usability o f the skills after the OPDA. □ □ □ □ □

55. Your satisfaction with your district's current
OPD program. □ □ □
moderate
excellent
does not
apply
Based on the experience you had, how would
good
poor
vou rate the following online PDA?
56. Online courses. □ □ □ - i

57. Online course supplements. □ □ □ □ □
58. Online workshops. □ □ □ □ ■.
59. Online video-conferencing. □ □ □ □ □
60. WebC'T. □ □ □ □ □
61. Which do you prefer? □ Face-to-face PD □ Online PD

62. Would you consider participating in additional online professional development activities?
63. Do you have any suggestions to improve online professional development?
64. Were there certain aspects of online professional development activity(ies) that proved more
effective than others?
65. Were there certain aspects of online professional development activity(ies) that proved less
effective than others?
66. Can professional development be done solely online? Why or why not?
Thank You!
115
APPENDIX B
HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION REVIEW
The University of 118 College Drive #5147

Southern Mississippi Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001
Tel: 601.266.6820
Institutional Review Board Fax: 601.266.5509
www.usm.edu/irb
TO: Nisrine Shatila

c/o Kyna Shelly, Ph.D.
118 College Drive #5027
Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001
FROM: Lawrence A. Hosman, Ph.D.

HSPRC Chair
PROTOCOL NUMBER: 27030727

PROJECT TITLE: Teachers' Attitudes Toward Traditional and Online
Professional Development
Enclosed is The University of Southern Mississippi Human Subjects Protection

Review Committee Notice of Committee Action taken on the above referenced
project proposal, If I can be of further assistance, contact me at (601) 266-4279,
FAX at (601) 266-4275, or you can e-mail me at Lawrence.Hosman@usm.edu.
Good luck with your research.
116
The University of U8 College Drive #5147

S o u th ern M ississippi Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001
Tel: 601.266.6820
Institutional Review Board Fax: 601.266.5509
www.usra.edu/irb
HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTECTION REVIEW COMMITTEE

NOTICE OF COMMITTEE ACTION
The project has been reviewed by The University of Southern Mississippi Human Subjects
Protection Review Committee in accordance with Federal Drug Administration regulations
(21 CFR 26,111), Department of Health and Human Services (45 CFR Part 46), and
university guidelines to ensure adherence to the following criteria:
• The risks to subjects are minimized.

• The risks to subjects are reasonable in relation to the anticipated benefits.
• The selection of subjects is equitable.
• Informed consent is adequate and appropriately documented.
• Where appropriate, the research plan makes adequate provisions for monitoring the
data collected to ensure the safety of the subjects.
• Where appropriate, there are adequate provisions to protect the privacy of subjects and
to maintain the confidentiality of all data.
• Appropriate additional safeguards have been included to protect vulnerable subjects.
• Any unanticipated, serious, or continuing problems encountered regarding risks to subjects
must be reported immediately, but not later than 10 days following the event. This should
be reported to the IRB Office via the “Adverse Effect Report Form”.
• If approved, the maximum period of approval is limited to twelve months.
Projects that exceed this period must submit an application for renewal or continuation.
PROTOCOL NUMBER: 27030727

PROJECT TITLE: Teachers' Attitudes Toward Traditional and
PROPOSED PROJECT DATES: 02/15/07 to 12/30/07
PROJECT TYPE: New Project
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS: Nisrine Adada Shatila
COLLEGE/DIVISION: College of Education & Psychology
DEPARTMENT: Educational Leadership & Research
FUNDING AGENCY: N/A
HSPRC COMMITTEE ACTION: Expedited Review Approval
PERIOD OF APPROVAL: 03/07/07 to 03/06/08
3-oS-oi
Lawrence A. Hosman, Ph.D. Date
HSPRC Chair
APPENDIX C
PERMISSION LETTERS FROM THE SUPERINTENDENTS OF THE NINE

PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Hattiesburg Public School District

Post Office Box 1569
Annie P. Wimbish, Ed.D.

Superintendent
March 23, 2007
Ms Nisrine Adala Shatila

118 College Drive, # 6928
Hattiesburg, Ms 39406-0001
Dear Ms Adala:
Your request to conduct a study using a questionnaire in the Hattiesburg Public

School District is approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. Human Subjects Protection Committee approval must be obtained before

material will be distributed. Please return those approval documents to my attention.
2. Upon approval by the HSPRC, your questionnaires and other material should
be bundled and brought to the HPSD Central Office in accordance with the following:
Hattiesburg High School 80 Grace Christian Elementary 30

Ninth Grade Academy 30 Hawkins Elementary 30
Bethune Alternative School 15 Rowan Elementary 30
Burger Middle School 80 Thames Elementary 80
Burney Elementary School 35 Woodley Elementary 35
Your material will be sent to each school with a notice from this office asking principals
to deliver the material to each teacher. Questionnaires should include a stamped, self-
addressed return envelope for teachers to return them to you. HPSD personnel will not be
tasked with collecting and returning the questionnaires.
3. Permission is granted for this study only. Any future research must be
considered separately.
Sincerely,
Alan Oubre
Executive Director of Support Services
CF:
Dr. Gloria Robinson
Executive Director o f Support Services

aoubre@hpsd.1d 2. ms.us • 601-582-5531* Fax: 601-582-6666
118
Brookhaven School District

P.O. Box 540
Brookhaven, Mississippi 39602-0540
Lea Barrett
S uperintendent
February 2, 2007
Ms. Nisrine Adada Shatila

Educational Leadership & Research
University of Southern Mississippi
118 College Drive, #6928
Dear Ms. Shatila:
Upon approval from the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board of The University of
Southern Mississippi, Nisrine Adada Shatila has permission to collect data for her
dissertation project Online Professional Development by distributing questionnaires to
K-12 teachers in our district.
Please contact my office if you need more information.
Sincerely,
Lea Barrett
Superintendent
Street Address: 326 East Court Street • Brookhaven, Mississippi • (601) 833-6661 • (601) 833-4154 FAX
119
(601) 847-1562
Cmmtg j^tjtycrol Jitgbrtct Superintei
(601) 847-8003 FAX Jack M. Me
(601) 847-8001 FAX 111 Education Lane
Mendenhall, Mississippi 39114
http://simpson.kl2.ms.us
February 23 2007
To Whom It May Concern:
Sincerely,
Jack McAlpin, Superintendent

Simpson County School District
/bm
(©ccrmJssprargs
^chonl
2300 G o v e r n m e n t St .
P ost O ffice Box 7002
Ocean S prings , M S ..3.9566-7002
P ho ne (228) 875-7706
' ' Fa x (228) B75-1775 February 14.2007
. jAfwrfwisilratTOtt
R o b e r t fi. H ir s c h , M .E d .
: . S u per in ten d en t
D e b o r a h F . F r e m in . B d .S .
Upon approval from the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board
A s s is ta n t S u p e rin te n d e n t
P ersonnel. o f The University o f Southern Mississippi, Nisrine Adada Shatila has
M a r k L e e P e r e s ic h , M.Ed; permission to collect data for her dissertation project Online

: A ssis tant S u per in ten d en t
I n s tr u c tio n Professional Development by distributing questionnaires to

•'Sjrlunit Suuiffc
SharonH . W a lker, P h .D .
P r e s id e n t
L ena H. M elton, Ed.D.

Robert E. Hirsch
S ecr eta ry :
K fjth C r o sby
Superintendent
■ Karen C. W h it l e y
Jo h n C .B renrb
"C hildren - O ur Greatest

N a tu ra l Resource” .
121
%jnQ(David%ush, Td. D., Superintendent

IND1AN01A
S C H O O L DI STRI CT
jm i@ tndeM 2.m M
7023f^mayEi§ky -4wo ‘East
V In £ m (a ,M 38751
V tidep&m ffl-8 8 7 -m <Fa% 662-887-7042
Smmie‘M. Cri§ler, Ed (P., Assistant Superintendent SamM(tyfer§wdeM2m.us 662-887-7419
January 5,2007
To Whom It May Concern:
Upon approval from the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board of the University of
K-12 teachers in the Indianola School District.
Sincerely,
King David Rush, Ed, D.

Superintendent
122
Greenwood Public School District

P. 0 . Box 1497 8 Greenwood, Mississippi 38935-1497
Leslie L. Daniels, Ed. D. , Superintendent
662-453-4231
February 6, 2007
To Whom it May Concern:
K-12 teachers in the Greenwood Public School District.
Leslie L. Daniels, Ed.D.

Superintendent
02-16-1? 89:12 FRQHKSD 2284664895 T-021 P I2 /I2 F-902
Kim M, Stastty, Ph,D.. Superintendent

201 Carroll Ave,
BaySt. Louis, MS39520
Fax; 228.466,4895
228,467.6621
Upon approval from the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board of the University of
dissertation project Online Professional Development by distributing questionnaires to K-
12 teachers in our district.
Kimlpiy
Bay St. Louis-Waveland School District

201 Carroll Avenue
Bay St. Louis, MS 39520
(228)467-6621
APR-16-2007 MON 11:58 AM COVINGTON CO SCHOOLS
FAX NO, 601 765 4101 P. 02
BOARD OF
Coiimgton Court? ikjjool Bfetritt S U P E R IN T E N D E N T
O F ED U C A TIO N
EDUCATION
P.O. 3ox 1269 I.S. Iks* Sanford, Jr.
Terry Bryant
Sammy H. Herrin
Collins, Mi ssissippi 39428
a s s is t a n t s u p e b in t e n d e n t
Andrew Keys Telephone 601-765-8247 OF EDUCATION
Robert “Bob” McNair Larry N.Wpp
Fax 6C1-765-4101
Dr, Ray Streback
April 16,2007
Dear Sir or Madam:
Upon approval from the Human Subjects Institutional Revim Board of

The University' of Southern Mississippi, Nisrine Adada Shatila has permission to
collect data for her dissertation prefect Online Professional Development by

distributing questionnaires to K-12 teachers in our district
I.S. Sanford, Jr.

Superintendent of Education
125
0 2 /W /i0 T 1 5 :l5 F l ef19641211 PERRfCOUHTVSCHSOLS - 1001/001
P erry C o u n ty S choo ls
Scott Dem on, Superintendent ofEducation
Ptonntl P.O. Box137 Bm iU aAm
' M k tm M S M M m EUwHarlfitli
Mnfkm.hmmQffmr m m tl PrtdritiJacim
m -i■ -,* * * * & M is m m
Tint Pintos, F itj ThrtfShmuk
M tP rim k n to y /m M tn S m ,Jr.
Upon approval from the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board of The
University of Southern Mississippi, Nisrine A M Shatila has permission to collect data
for her dissertation project Online Professional Development by distributing
questionnaires to K -1 2 teachers in our district
126
APPENDIX D
LETTER TO TEACHER/CONSENT FORM
March, 2007
I am a graduate student at The University of Southern Mississippi in the Educational

Leadership & Research Department. I am conducting a research study of K-12 teachers
to study their attitudes toward online and traditional professional development under the
supervision of Dr. Ronald Styron Jr., Associate Dean of the College of Education &
Psychology.
As a participant you are being asked to fill out a questionnaire, which will take
approximately 15 minutes. I will hold all of your responses in the strictest of confidence.
No names will be reported on any documents. In addition, all data will be reported in
aggregate form only. Your participation in this study is voluntary. You are free not to
answer any question and to withdraw from this study at any time without penalty.
Although there may be no direct individual benefits, this study and the related survey
play a key role in the work of administrators in evaluating and improving professional
development programs which have a great impact on teachers’ and students’
performance.
Please accept my thanks in advance for your help in this study. If you have any inquiry
about the research study or the survey instrument please contact me. By filling out and
returning the questionnaire in the envelope provided, you are indicating your consent to
participate in the study. Please return on or before April 12, 2007. Your confidentiality is
guaranteed. I appreciate your assistance and cooperation with this important study.
Sincerely,
Nisrine Adada Shatila

Graduate Assistant
118 College Dr. #6928
Hattiesburg, MS 39406
This project and this consent form have been reviewed by the Institutional Review Board, which ensures that
research projects involving human participants follow federal regulations. Any questions or concerns about
rights as a research participant should be directed to the Chair of the Institutional Review Board, The
University of Southern Mississippi, 118 College Drive #5147, Hattiesburg, MS 39406-0001, (601) 266-6820.
127
APPENDIX E
Table
Summary of Responses to Qualitative Questions from the Survey
Variable Variable Description Summary of Responses
Q62 Would you consider Yes (78%)
participating in No (22%)
additional online
professional
development
activities?
Q63 Suggestions to No suggestions (45.7%)
improve OPD More support & feedback (10 %)
Clear instructions (1.4%)
Easier access to instructor (1.4%)
Reliable computers at school (2.9%)
More OPD, more variety (5.7%)
More OPD to count as CEUs (2.9%)
Let teachers choose the OPD (1.4%)
Needs to meet users’ needs (8.6%)
Needs to be relevant & useful (4.3%)
Needs to be simpler & shorter (4.3%)
More information on availability
(1.4%)
128
Table (continued).
More time at school for OPD (4.3%)
Fewer assignments & deadlines
(1.4%)
Provide more material (2.9%)
Need to be less technical (1.4%)
Q64 Effective aspects of None (41.7%)
OPDA I learned more by doing (1.7%)
I worked at my own pace (8.3%)
Follow-up (1.7%)
Good readings (3.3%)
Having a product/outcome based
(3.3%)
Live chat & discussions (8.3%)
Conference calls (1.7%)
Interactivity (1.7%)
Visuals (3.3%)
Access & availability (5%)
Multiple choice questions (1.7%)
Yes (13.3%)
Valuable links & web pages (3.3%)
129
Table (continued).
Review of skills (1.7%)
Step by step instructions (1.7%)
Useful teaching strategies (1.7%)
Technology training (1.7%)
Q65 Less effective None (45.6%)
aspects of OPDA Some (1.8%)
Yes (14%)
Just reading handouts or slides
(5.3%)
Lengthy sessions (3.5%)
No direct contact with instructor
( 1.8%)
Slow feedback & support (7%)
No follow-up (1.8%)
No interaction (1.8%)
Hard for teachers with limited
computer skills (1.8%)
Tests (1.8%)
No hands-on activities (1.8%)
No visuals (1.8%)
130
Table (continued).
Too much chatting (1.8%)
Unclear directions (1.8%)
Technical difficulties (5.3%)
Too much information at once (1.8%)
Q66 Can professional Yes (15%)
development be No (82.8%)
done solely online? Not sure (2.2%)

Why?
I work on my own pace (7.1%)
All districts have computers &
Internet (7.1%)
Information & activities can be
shared online (7.1%)
I learn more via online (7.1%)
I don’t see why not (7.1%)
Sure, if teachers are provided with
technological help (7.1%)
Hands-on activities can be simulated
effectively on a computer (7.1%)
Saves meeting time/learn more
(7.1%)
131
Table (continued).
• Many teachers can go through
training at the same time (7.1%)
• I love it. It is convenient (7.1%)
Why not? • a combination of face-to-face and
OPD is better (1.3%)
• Not all teachers are comfortable with
using computers (7.8%)
• Communication should vary to meet
individual teachers’ needs (9.1%)
• Face-to-face provides more instant
feedback (11.7%)
• Need real life experiences/hands-on
( 13%)
• Need human interaction with other
teachers & instructor (39%)
• Need visuals used in face-to-face
(2 .6 %)
• Need active participation (5.8%)
• Need more information about OPD
(1.3%)
132
Table (continued).
• We benefit more from face-to-face
(2 .6 %)
• Many teachers do not have
computer/Internet access outside
school (1.3%)
• Some topics cannot be done online
(1.3%)
• Online classes need more focusing
(1.3%)
• Timing is overwhelming (1.3%)
133
APPENDIX F
A SUMMARY OF THE FREQUENCIES AND PERCENTAGES OF TEACHERS’

RESPONSES
Based on the experience you had
m oderate
not at all
none or
in professional development
high
very
high
L ow
(PD), how would you rate the
following?
i
17. PD impact on your student
11(3.6% ) 3 4(11% ) 149(48.4% ) 92(29.9% ) 22(7 ,1 % ) ;
achievement.
18. PD impact on your teaching practices. 5 (1.6% ) 21(6.8%)) 117(38%)) 130(42.2% ) 35(11.4%))
Id. Your satisfaction with ynur district's

81,2 .0 % ) 73(23.6% ) 120(38.8% ) 93(30.1% ) 15(4.9% )
current P D program.
20. Teachers’ involvement in PD

42(13.5% ) 89(28.7%)) 102(32.9%)) 60(19.4% ) 17(5.5% )
planning.
21. I'hc choice you have in the type nl PD

54(17.5% ) 92t 29.8% t 96(31.1% ) 57(18.4% ) 10(3.2% )
you receive.
22. The value o f integrating technology
4(1 .3 % ) 31(10% ) 80(25.9%)) 133(43% ) 61(19.7%))
into instruction.
PDA: Face-to-Face Professional Face-to-face PD

Development Activity(ies)
m oderate
not at ail
none or
high
high
very
*
in face-to-face PDA. how would
you rate the following?
23. The importance o f the PDA. I f .3% t 28(9%)) 106(34.2% ) 129(41.6% ) 46( 14.8%)
24. The usefulness o f the P D A . 0(0% ) 28(9% ) 123(39.7%)) 123(39.7% ) 36(11.6% )
25. The benefit \ou received from the

3t 1% t 33(10.7% ) 123(39.8%)) 1 2 0 (3 8 .8 % ) 30(9 .7 % )
PDA.
26. The degree o f knowledge you received
2(.6% ) 27(8.7% ) 129(41.7%)) 124(40.1%,) 27(8.7%,)
from the PDA.
27. Your confidence in the skills you
411.3% i 2 0 (0 .5 '; t 127(41% ) 128(41.3% ) 31(10% )
learned in the PD A .
28. The helpfulness o f the instructor o f
0 (0% ) 14(4.5% ) 119(38.5%,) 146(47.2% ) 30(9.7% )
the PD A .
29. The feedback you received during the
8(2.6% ) 37(11.9%)) 128(41.3% ) 116(37.4% ) 21(6.8% )
PDA.
30. The feedback you received after the
19(6.2%)) 69(22.4% ) 124(40.3%,) 80(26% ) 16(5.2% )
PDA.
31. The support and guidance you
1(.3% ) 30(9.7% t 131(42.3% ) 129(41.6) 19(6.1% )
received during the PI >A.
32. The usability o f the skills after the
6 (1.9% ) 27(8.7% ) 144(46.5% ) 112(36.1% ) 21(6.8% )
PD A .
134
moderate
Excellent
Based on the experience you had,
does not
apply
good
poor
how would you rate the following
face-to-face PDA?
I
126(40.9
33. University courses. 49(15.9%) 13(4.2%) 66(21.2%) 54(17.5%)
%)
135(43.8
34. Workshops. 5(1.6%) 13(4.2%) 95(30.8%) 60(19.5%)
%)
128(41.4
35. Conferences. 14(4.5%) 16(5.2%) 90(29.1%) 61(19.7%)
%)
36. M entoring programs. 78(25.7%) 29(9.6%) 81(26.7%) 92(30.4%) 23(7.6%)
37. Institutes or Academies. 77(25.5%) 22(7.3%) 81(26.8%) 88(29.1%) 34(11.3%)
38. Professional learning communities. 91(30.1%) 22(7.3%) 87(28.8%) 74(24.5%) 28(9.3%)
If you have not participated in online professional development, please STOP here
and return questionnaire. Thank You!
OPDA: Online Professional

Online PD
Development
Activity(ies)
m oderate
not at all
none or
very
high
high
sf
in online PDA, how would you
rate the following?
39. The importance o f the O PD A . K i% ) 13(13.1% ) 31(31.3% ) 44(44.4% ) 10(10.1% )
40. The usefulness o f the O P D A . i( i% ) 15(15.3% ) 31(31.6% ) 38(38.8% ) 13(13.3% )
41. 1'lic lienelit ju u ivcciusJ I'rein die

id % ) 16(16.5% ) 28(28.9% ) 4 0(4 1 .2 % ) 12(12.4% )
O PD A .
42. The degree o f knowledge you received
H i% ) 15(15.2% ) 29(29.3% ) 42(42.4% ) 12(12.1% )
from the O P D A .
43. Your eonlidenee in die skills you
It I'M 12(12.3% ) 38(38.8% ) 40(40.8%.) 7(7 ,1 % )
learned in the O PD A .
44. The helpfulness o f the instructor o f
5(5.1% ) 18(18.2% ) 48(48.5% ) 2 2(22.2% ) 6(6.1% )
the O PDA.
45. The feedback vou received during the
5(5.1% ) 21(21.2% ) 37(37.4% ) 30(30.3% ) 6(6.1%)
OPDA.
46. The feedback you received after the
9(9.2% ) 2 4(24.5% ) 37(37.8% ) 23(23.5% ) 5(5.1% )
O PD A .
47. The support and guidance you
5 (5 % ) 13(13% ) 44(44% ) 33(33% ) 5 (5 % )
received during the O P D A .
48. Your comfort level in integrating
technology into your instruction before 3 (3% ) 18(18% ) 37(37% ) 31(31% ) 11(11% )
participating in O P D A .
40. Your ciMttlon lc \c l in integrating
technology into \n u r inMinclii'ii after lil'.,) 1 1( 1 1 . 1 i 15(35.4%) 40(40.4% ) 12(12,1% )
participating in O PD A .
135
50. Your use o f the Internet as part o f

your teaching method before participating 7(7.1% ) 15(15.2% ) 36(36.4% ) 31(31.3% ) 10(10.1%))
in the O PD A .
51. Your use o f the Internet as pan of
your leaching method after participating 2 (2 '; i 14(14.1% ) 36(36.4% ) 34(34.3% ) 13(13.1% )
in the O P D A .
52. The number of assignments you gave
directing students to research via the 2 3(23% ) 30(30% ) 29(29% ) 16(16%)) 2(2% )
Internet before you participated in O PD A .
55. The number of assignments you gave
directing '.Indents to research via the 20(20.2% 1 21(21.2% ) 31(31.3% ) 22 ( 22 .2 %) 5 (5 .1 % ) •
Internet after you participated in O P D A .
54. The usability o f the skills after the
9(9.2% ) 15(15.3% ) 36(36.7%)) 32 ( 32 .7 %) 6 ( 6 . 1%)
O PD A .
55. Your satisfaction with your district’s
15(15.2% ) 3 0(30.3% ) 35(35.4%)) 13(13.1% ) 6( 6 . 1%)
current OPD program.
moderate
excellent
does not
apply
Based on the experience you had,
good
poor
how would you rate the following
online PDA?
56. Online courses. 9(8.9% ) 8(7.9% ) 32(31.7%) 41(40.6%) 11(10.9%)
57. Online course supplements. 23(22.8%) 9(8.9%) 30(29.7%) 31(30.7%) 8(7.9%))
58. Online workshops. 21(21%) 11(11%) 31(31%) 31(31%) 6(6%)
59. Online video-conferencing. 36(36%) 12(12%) 23(23%) 25(25%) 4(4%)
60. WebCT. 45(45.5% t 7(7.1% t 20(20.2%) 24(24.2%) 3(3%)
136
REFERENCES
Adsit, J. N. (2004). Technology-mediated professional development programs for
teachers and school leaders. Washington, DC: American Association of
Colleges for Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED484654)
Anderson, M. A. (2000, January). Staff development: Your most important role.
Multimedia Schools, 7(1), 24-27. Retrieved November 5, 2006, from
http://www.infotoday.com/MMschools/MMStocs/janOOtoc.htm
Barkley, S., & Bianco, T. (2002). Part digital training, part human touch: Rural
district mixes its offering of staff development services [Electronic
Version]. Journal of Staff Development, 23(1), 42-45.
Barnett, E. (2004). Characteristics and perceived effectiveness of staff
development practices in selected high schools in south Dakota.
Educational Research Quarterly, 28(2), 3-18.
Barth, R. (2001). Learning by heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Berry, B., Hoke, M., & Hirsch, E. (2004). NCLB: Highly qualified teachers- the
search for highly qualified teachers. Phi Delta Kappa, 85, 684-689.
Bintrim, L. (2002). Redesigning professional development. Educational
Leadership, 59(6), 96-98.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the
terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
137
Bryan, P. (2000, October). A seamless integration of technology. Edutopia.
Retrieved November 5, 2006, from
http://www.edutopia.org/php/article.php?id=Art_415
Burke, M. A. (1994). Designing effective electronic distance education programs
for k-12 staff development. Clearing House, 67, 233-240.
Bush, G. (2005). Logging on to staff development [Electronic Version]. T H E
Journal, 32(11), 14-18.
Clement, M., & Vandenberghe, R. (2001). How school leaders can promote
teachers’ professional development. An account from the field. School
Leadership & Management, 21(\), 43-57.
Clifford, P. (2005). Cyberkids. Education Canada, 45(2), 14-16.
Cole, M., & Styron, R. (2006). Traditional or online methods of professional
development: A comparative study of K-12 teacher preferences. Journal of
Research for Educational Leaders, 3(2), 24-38.
Cole, M., & Styron, R. (2005). Traditional or online methods of professional
development: What do teachers prefer? International Society for
Teachers. 1-10. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from
http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Research/NECC_Research_
Paper_Archives/NECC_2005/Styron-Ronald-N ECC05.pdf
Collins, T., & Dewees, S. (2001). Challenge and promise: Technology in the
classroom. Rural South: Preparing for the Challenges of the 21st Century,
(18), 1-8.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most: Investing in quality
teaching. Retrieved October 20, 2006, from
http://www.tc.columbia.edu/nctaf/publications/doing.html
Denham, T. J., & Adbow, N. (2002). Literature review: Factors affecting the
development of generation x and millennials. Societal factors affecting
education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478488)
Desimone, L. M., Smith, T. M., & Ueno, K. (2006). Are teachers who need
sustained, content-focused professional development getting it? An
administrator's dilemma. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42, 179-
215.
Desinone, L., Porter, A. C., Birman, B. F., Garet, M. S., & Yoon, K. S. (2002).
How do district management and implementation strategies relate to the
quality of the professional development that districts provide to teachers?
Teachers College Record, 104, 1265-1312.
Dickenson, G., McBride, J., Lamb-Milligan, J., & Nichols, J. (2003). Delivering
authentic staff development. Education, 124(1), 163-168.
Drago-Severson, E. (2002). School leadership in the support of teachers'
transformational learning: The dramatic differences resources make.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association (New Orleans, Louisiana, 2002).
Drago-Severson, E., & Pinto, K. C. (2003). School leadership in support of
teachers’ transformational learning: Drawing from the well of human
resources. Chicago, IL: Spencer Foundation. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED478250)
Dufour, R., & Berkey, T. (1995). The principal as staff developer [ Electronic
Version]. Journal of Staff Development, 16(4), 2-6.
Engstrom, M. E., & Danielson, L. M. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of an on-site
staff development model. Clearing House, 7 9 ,170-173.
Ertmer, P. A., Bai, H., Dong, C., Khalil, M., Park, S. H., & Wang, L. (2002). Online
professional development: Building administrators' capacity for technology
leadership. West Lafayette, in: Purdue University. (ERIC Document
Firestone, W. A., Mangin, M. M., Martinez, M. C., & Polovsky, T. (2005). Leading
coherent professional development: A comparison of three districts.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 41, 413-448.
Fletcher, G. H. (2005). Why aren’t dollars following need? The need for
professional development is enormous and expressed; the question is,
where’s the money. T H E Journal, 32(11), 4.
Fulton, K., & Riel, M. (1999, May). Professional development through learning
communities. Edutopia. Retrieved November 5, 2006, from
http://www.edutopia.org/php/article.php?id=Art_481&key=238
140
Glyer, S. (2004, April 1). Staff development and technology solutions.
TechLEARNING. Retrieved November 5, 2006, from
http://www.techlearning.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articlelD=18401010
Golden, M. (2004). Technology’s potential, promise for enhancing student
learning [Electronic Version], T H E Journal, 3/(12), 42-44.
Goodlad, J. (1994). Educational renewal: Better teachers, better schools. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Green, K. C. (2006). Bring data: A new role for information technology after the
spellings commission. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(6), 30-47. Retrieved
January 19, 2007, from
http://www.educause.edu/apps/er/erm06/erm0661.asp
Gross, D., Truesdale, C., & Bielec, S. (2001). Backs against the wall: Supporting
teacher professional development with technology. Educational Research
and Evaluation: An International Journal of Theory and Practice, 7(2/3),
161-183.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers
and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8, 381-391.
Haar, J. (2001). Providing professional development for rural educators. The
Annual Convention of the National Rural Education Association, 1-14.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional
development: A new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond and G. Sykes
(Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and
practice (pp. 127-150). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hirsh, S., Mizell, H., & Aviss-Spedding, E. (2005). A study of professional
development for public school educators in West Virginia. Final Report for
the West Virginia Legislative Oversight Commission on Education
Accountability (pp. 1-105). Oxford, OH: National Staff Development
Council.
Hirsh, S. (2005). Professional development and closing the achievement gap.
Theory into Practice, 44(1), 38-44.
Hokanson, B., & Hooper, S. (2004). Integrating technology into classrooms: We
have met the enemy and he is us. Chicago, IL: Association for Educational
Communications and Technology. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED485143)
Holland, H. (2005). Teaching teachers: Professional development to improve
student achievement. American Education Research Association, 3(1), 1-
4.
Hull, C. L., Hovland, C. I., Ross, R. T., Hall, M., Perkins, D. T., & Fitch, F. B.
(1940). Mathematico-Deductive Theory of Rote Learning. New Haven, NJ:
Yale University Press.
Ireh, M. (2006). Effects of product-based technology professional development
model on P-8 teachers. Online Submission. (ERIC Document
Johnson, D. (2004). Ban or boost student-owned technology? School
Administrator, 67(10), 8.
Johnson, S. M., Birkeland, S., Kardos, S. M., Kauffman, D., Liu, E., & Peske, H.
G. (2001, July). Retaining the next generation of teachers: The
importance of school-based support. Harvard Education Letter, 77(4), 6-
8.
Kenser, R. J. (2001). Online learning for teachers. Streamlined Seminar, 20(1),
1-7.
Killion, J. (2000). Log on to learn: To reap benefits of online staff development,
ask the right questions [Electronic Version]. Journal of Staff Development,
21(3), n.p.
Killion, J. (2002). Loading the e-learning shopping cart: First examine the product
and service for student results [Electronic Version]. Journal of Staff
Development, 23(1), 12-16.
Kleyn-Kennedy, C. (2006, November 1). Teachers and technology-what’s left?
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From andragogy
to pedagogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Cambridge Adult Education.
Lauer, P., Dean, C., Martin-Glenn, M., & Asensio, M., (2005, October 18).
Teacher Quality Toolkit. 2nd Edition. Mid-Continent Research for
Education and Learning (McREL). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED486633)
143
Linek, W. M., Fleener, C., Fazio, M., Raine, I. L., & Klakamp, K. (2003). The
Impact of shifting from “how teachers teach” to “how children learn”.
Journal of Educational Research, 97(2), 78-89.
Linn, R. (2005, April). Test-based educational accountability in the era of No
Child Left Behind. CSE Report 651. National Center for Research on
Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED488732).
Louie, C., & Hargrave, S. (2006). Technology in Massachusetts Schools 2004-
2005 (pp. 1-39). Malden, MA: Massachusetts Department of Education.
McKenzie, J. (1991). Designing staff development for the information age. FNO
The Educational Technology Journal, 7(4). Retrieved July 8, 2005, from
http://fno.org/fnoapr91 .html
McKenzie, J. (1998). Have it your way with online learning. eSchool News.
Retrieved June 6,2005, from http://staffdevelop.org/online.html
McKenzie, J. (1999). Reaching the reluctant teacher. eSchool News. Retrieved
June 6, 2005, from http://staffdevelop.org/reluctant.html
Mississippi Department of Education (1998). Professional development for the
new millennium: Professional development model. Retrieved November
30, 2006, from http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/acad/pdm.html
Mississippi Department of Education (2003). Renewal Facts. Licensure Facts,
7(1), 1-4. Retrieved November 30, 2006, from
http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/edJicensure/LicensureFacts/page2.html
144
Mississippi Department of Education (2004). Technology Plan. Retrieved
November 30, 2006 from
http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/olpd/stateplan/pdfs/sheet1.pdf
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
Norusis, M. (2005). SPSS 13.0 Guide to Data Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education.
Oblinger, D. (2003). Boomers, gen-xers, and millennials: Understanding the
“new students.” EDUCAUSE Review, 38(4), 40-45. Retrieved January 19,
2007, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0342.pdf
Oelrich, K. (2001). Loading Virtual schools [Electronic Version]. T H E Journal,
28(11), 48-50.
Parker, G. (n.d.) PBS TeacherLine. Retrieved November 5, 2006, from
http://teacherline.pbs.org/teacherline/
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-2.
Prensky, M. (2006). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13.
Reid, S. (2002). The achievement gap 2002: How minority students are faring in
North Carolina's public schools. An update. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina
Justice and Community Development Center.
Richardson, J. (2001). E-learning potentials: Online staff development has great
possibilities- and pitfalls [Electronic Version], Results.
Richardson, V., & Placier, P. (2001). Teacher change. In V. Richardson (Ed.),
Handbook o f research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 905-947). Washington,
DC: American Educational Research Association.
145
Rose, A. D. (1996, Fall). Group learning in adult education: Its historical roots.
New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 71, 3-13.
Salpeter, J. (2003, August 15). Professional development: 21st century models.
Shreve, J. (2005, April). Let the games begin. Video games, once confiscated in
class, are now a key teaching tool. If they’re done right. Edutopia.
Retrieved December 15, 2006, from
http://www.edutopia.org/magazine/ed1 article. php?id=art_1268&issue=apr
_05
Sparks, D. (2002). Designing powerful professional development for teachers
and principals. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
Social Science Research Center Mississippi State University, (n.d.) NASA and
The Gulf Coast Education Initiative Consortium: Providing professional
development for educators of the 21st century, 1-24.
Sternin, J., & Choo, R. (2000, January). The power of positive deviancy. Harvard
Business Review, 2-3.
The National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching (1999).
Revisioning professional development: What learner-centered
professional development looks like. (pp. i-20). Oxford, OH: National Staff
Development Council.
The Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2004). The road to 21st century learning:
A policymaker’s guide for 21st century skills, (pp. 1-25). Washington, DC:
Author.
Vojtek, O., & Vojtek, B. (1996). “Nefworking: Staff development online
[Electronic Version], Journal of Staff Development, 17(4), 60-62.
Wang, Y. (2000). Training teachers using computers: A process of familiarization,
utilization, and integration. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(1),
46-53.
Weiler, A. (2004). Information-seeking behavior in generation y students:
Motivation, critical thinking, and learning theory. T H E Journal, 37(10), 66-
71.
Wilcox, B., Bauschard, S., & Osterhus, J. (1998, January 1). The information
superhighway: How much fun is it? Reading Teacher, 51, 706-709. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. EJ567324)
Wood, C. (2005, April). Highschool.com. All over the country, secondary school
students are going online for classes. Will the virtual classroom redefine
what it means to be a student-or a teacher? Edutopia. Retrieved
December 15, 2006, from
http://www.edutopia.org/magazine/ed1 article. php?id=art_1270&issue=apr
_05
Wood, G. (2006). Recognizing the generational divide: When x meets y at the
tribal college. Tribal College Journal of American Indian Higher Education,
17(4), 66-71.
147
Zemke, R. (2001). Here come the millennials. Training, 38(7), 44-49.
Zenger, J., & Uehlein, C. (2001). Why blended will win. Training & Development,
55(8), 54-62.

The Role of Technology in Teachers - Professional Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Role of Technology in Teachers - Professional Development

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Role of Technology in Teachers - Professional Development

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The University of Southern Mississippi

The Aquila Digital Community

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL

Follow this and additional works at: https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL

Nisrine Nabih Adada

NISRINE NABIH ADADA

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL

Nisrine Nabih Adada

THE ROLE OF TECHNOLOGY IN TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL

by Nisrine Nabih Adada

Professional staff development is a learning process that teachers go

through on a yearly basis. The literature confirms that high-quality professional

development has a positive effect on teacher and student performances. Living in

to-face professional development and online professional development. The

study also investigated teachers’ perceived level of support in face-to-face and

online professional training. Furthermore, the study examined teachers’ attitudes

toward utilizing technology as an instructional tool in their classes before and

after they participated in online professional development. The researcher

questionnaire; quantitative and qualitative information was gathered. The

quantitative data revealed a significant difference between teachers’ attitudes

toward face-to-face and online professional development; teachers had more

quantitative data related to teachers’ perceived level of support in online and

face-to-face professional development revealed significant difference. The results

of this study showed that teachers received more support in face-to-face

professional development than they did in online professional development.

Moreover, the quantitative data related to teachers’ attitudes toward utilizing

technology as an instructional tool in their classes revealed significant difference.

in online professional training. Furthermore, the results of this study indicated

that the majority of teachers reported their willingness to participate in more

online professional development programs. The qualitative data suggested that

Moreover, the qualitative data indicated that ample teacher-involvement and

teacher-support were needed for online professional development to be more

I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my beloved husband, Ahmad,

I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to my committee chair, Dr.

to express my appreciation to my statistician, Dr. Kyna Shelley, for her expertise

questionnaires. I am extremely grateful to all my family members and friends who

encouraged and supported me throughout this endeavor.

Statement of the Problem

II. REVIEW OF PERTINENT LITERAURE...........................................15

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 92

1. Demographic Characteristics of Sam ple..................................................... 71

3. Summary of the Cronbach Alpha Statistics of theSix Factors...................76

4. Summary of Means and Standard Deviations for the ThreeResearch

1. Teacher Participation in Online Professional Development.......................72

2. Teachers’ Preference for Professional Development.................................77

3. Teachers’ Willingness to Participate in More Online Professional

4. Teachers’ Satisfaction with Their Districts’ Professional Development and

Online Professional Development Programs............................................. 87

5. Teacher Involvement in the Planning of Professional Development......... 88

6. How Much Choice Teachers Have in the Professional Development They

7. Impact of Professional Development on Student Achievement.................90

8. The Value of Technology Integration into Instruction................................. 91

The first chapter of this study introduces the topic to be examined. It

presents a glimpse of the related literature. Moreover, it states the problem to be

justifications and the purpose behind the study.

“Professional development is a growth-promoting learning process that

empowers stakeholders (teachers, administrators, staff, and other school

personnel) to improve the educational organization” (MDE, 1998). A variety of