EVALUATION OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRAINING

This paper aims at evaluating workshop of School Head Teachers Association for Development of Education (SHADE) conducted on May 29, 2010, under the title “History and Historical Thinking in School Curriculum”. Professional Teacher Associations Network (PTAN) comprises nine teachers and Head Teachers organization that manages workshops for promoting sustainable, environment for professional growth and development of the overall education in Pakistan. SHADE is a member association among eight others. SHADE has mainly focused on the continuous professional development of the head teachers. through workshops and discussions to develop human and other resources required for the promotion of school management as an area of study and design practices that can contribute towards the development of education in the country. Workshop was conducted by two professors one from AKU-IED and other from University of Karachi. Approximately 51 head teachers from different primary and secondary level institutions attended the workshop.
Facilitators brainstormed on the topic” how we judge the reliability and validity of facts and figures written in the books of history” and lead open discussion about it. Controversy over validity and reliability in historical facts and figures are natural. Teachers can validities the facts providing evidences from Artifacts, (art work, archeological findings, cave paintings), Oral History (stories, songs, genealogies) and written history (letters, books, news papers, official and personal records). Through discussions made consensus that the Educators are duty bound to be careful about fake facts and figures included in curriculum and text books by some biased resources. Facilitators termed teaching controversial history like “walking on sharp edge of sword”. They quoted Muslim History for the wars fought between Hazart Ali and Hazart Muawea causing the massacre of hundreds and thousands of Muslims from both sides. While teaching such type of topic should be intended to resolve a conflict between two contradictory or apparently contradictory ideas or parts logically, establishing truth on both sides rather than disproving one argument. In workshop facilitators show another realistic aspect of pedagogy that “teaching history and historical thinking as powerful tools to relate to the past, present and future, and interpret theme as dynamic processes. In fact study of history can be emotive and controversial which needs especial care and skills to teach. In fact Unemotional, realistic, and impartial careful studies of such historical incidents of Muslim history are expected to help Muslims settle their sectarian disputes now and put positive effects on Muslim community in future.
We have some more transformational powerful philosophies to consider. For example ‘theory of Marxism deals with the philosophy of two apparently opposed ideas the thesis and anti thesis became combined in a unified whole, the synthesis’. Centuries ago before birth of Marxism Sufism discussed same Dialectics in other way to emphasizing on NAFI and ISBAT and they believed that God consists in every object which exists in this world. So when someone hurting, beating and doing any thing wrong with any body virtually he is doing same with Almighty. Sufi’s believe in love, respect, trust and giving. This is a time for educators especially who are teaching history to conceptualize controversial issues from eye of those angles also.
When I was trying to link all proceedings of workshop with Teachers Learning class room discourse I recognize many related indicators, philosophies and theories. Workshop was designed for adult group of head teachers for their professional development. In approach of the ‘Andragogy (Adult Education) it is believed that learners bring a greater volume and quality of experiences; they are virtually rich resources for one and another, however readiness to learn is essential aspect to bring change’. Learners “…most adult educators want to be informed of new ideas and changes in the field that might have some bearing on practice” Sharan B. Merriam (1993, p.105).
I am evaluating workshop findings as per Guskey’s five-level model for evaluating professional development, which consists of Participants, reactions, Participants’ learning, Organization support and change, Participants’ use of new knowledge and Student learning outcomes. These levels can be used formatively and summative as well however, “Formatively, we need to find out at each level what's been done well and, if not done well, how it can be improved. Summatively, we need to know the effectiveness of elements at each level to judge the true value and worth of any professional development endeavor”. (Guskey 2006). Here I discuss only 1st and 2nd level as per relativity. Because I don’t went for post observation for same participants in their respective schools. In Guskeys model of evaluation level one participant’s reactions column “selected questions address” as per observation and through interviews I understand that most of them liked the teaching history with new approaches, they also learned the ambiguities and complexities in teaching of history especially controversial and sensitive issues. The learned to validities the facts figures and events of history. As it was overcrowded class and they were faced bit difficulties to move around the class, so I say their time partially well spent. The material in form of handouts and slides shared with them was very useful, the knowledge they got from workshop might be helpful if they introduce same in their educational institutions for their own self and teacher’s professional development and for better outcome of students. However, my response about their understanding regarding level 1 column two and participants learning column 1st and 2nd are not encouraging. It might be due to overcrowded class, made difficult for facilitators to provide feedback to everyone or allow all participants with some rigors discussions. Out of 51 participants only five to six out took part in classroom interactions. Facilitator when enquired about knowing Blooms Taxonomy only two participants raised their hands; it was clear indication about lower level of understanding on their part for very popular theories of education.
In course of Teaching Learning classroom practices Learning Organizations theory of Peter Senge also came under discussion. The theory starts from Team learning, Building shared vision, providing mental models, and Personal mastery and in last creating Systems thinking in organization. Workshops are source to enrich the understanding and knowledge regarding diverse topic(s) of mutual interest. It is rightly said that ‘workshops are investigation of truth through discussion or the art of investigating truth through discussion’. Successful organizations mostly use this tool to develop effective communication skills among all level of human work force to create a leadership culture in organization which is essential part of professional development toward journey to make institution one learning organization. Workshops are being designed to help participants stay motivated and updated in their respective fields. However workshops are micro component and those isolated events lonely would not make school as Learning Organization.
We as a group of six M.Ed students decide to observe the SHADE workshop as it was supposed to be very close to our specialization course. Before going to scheduled workshop we contacted the PTAN office for relevant information. Secretary apologized for non availability of such needed written material; however, she was cooperative enough to provide the broachers about both PTAN and SHADE. Reading the broachers we understood the aims, objectives, mission and vision of PTAN and SHADE.
Thus we as a group discussed the strategies to collect data. We had consensus to utilize non structured informal interviews from participants and from facilitators and take on- spot observational notes during ongoing proceedings. I took notes and managed to get interviews from two workshop participants during tea break and an interview from facilitator after end of the session. Soon after the workshop I hurried to preserve data thus collected. Since I have observed that we lose the important and minute details if we leave the data unrecorded immediately. Next day the group met to share respective findings of SHADE workshop. To me working collegiality with group is just a joint cluster of healthy minds at one place. Working with colleagues I have learnt the passion, patience, trust, respect, and willingness to help each other when required. Collaborative working is highly effective and highly recommended for professional growth.
































REFERENCES

Guskey, R. (2002, Mar.). Redesigning Professional Development [Msg Volume 59 Number 6].
Does It Make a Difference?Evaluating Professional Development Message posted to http://www.nsrfharmony.org/guskey.pdf

Kreider, H., & Bouffard, S. (2006). Questions and answers: A conversation with Thomas R. Guskey. The Evaluation Exchange, XI(4), Winter 2005/2006. Retrieved April 4, 2006 from the Harvard Family Research Project web site at http://www.gse.harvard.edu/hfrp/eval/issue32/qanda.htm


Sharan . B. Merriam (Ed.), an update on adult learning theory. (pp. 105-110).New Directions in Adult and Continuing Education, no. 57. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.