Rethinking PD (Part 3)

This post is Part 3 in a 3 part series that will focus on building a virtual professional learning experience that is a hybrid of face to face PD and virtual PD. In Part 3, I will reflect on the data, what I learned, and next steps in moving forward with creating this as a sustainable and scalable model of PD. You can read Part 1 here and Part 2 here.

As I discussed in both Parts 1 and 2 of this series on rethinking PD, the virtual PD day offering was born out a need to explore an alternative option for professional learning, especially in the interim between face to face PD sessions. I know that face to face can’t be matched in its ability to truly impact learners, build relationships, and offer hands on experiences. However, I am beginning to see that face to face PD is not largely scaleable and has limitations and constraints when things like adverse weather is involved. I also realize that many districts and schools we serve have a need to see me (the facilitator) and work with me more than 4 times during a school year. In order to promote sustainability, a hybrid PD model offers the opportunity to create learning experiences, meet with small groups and individuals to provide coaching, and a chance to continue to connect with learners.

While the technical side of the virtual PD day I did with this district was flawless, there is still much room for improvement. Much of the feedback is specific to the district, the specific participants, and their prior experiences with professional learning. But, it’s still important to use this feedback as a means for growth, both of the idea itself and for me professional as a facilitator and content developer.

The goal of the live sessions I facilitated during this virtual PD day was to offer a more hands on, tutorial style session without losing the focus of pedagogy. This is not an easy feat in 30 minutes or less. I found that I had to be very specific and intentional in my choice of what topics to cover and which tools and resources to feature. The evaluation data (that participants filled out at the end of the day), showed that those who attended the live sessions enjoyed having me show and tell in small groups. I only had a few people join each live session, while most of the group chose to do the work at your own pace choice sessions. These sessions were designed to allow participants choice in topic and activity, promoting more learner agency. Most of the feedback was positive concerning the topics and choice provided.

Any time I facilitate PD, I have participants do an evaluation at the end. This evaluation changes depending on the session (whether it’s the first time we meet, the last time we’re meeting, or days in between). I created a special evaluation for this virtual day that asked more directed questions about the format, platform, scaffolding, and user experience. After receiving all the evaluations, I did my normal reflective routine and assessed the feedback for glows and grows. You can read more about evaluations, glows, and grows here.

So here’s some of what the evaluations told me:

GLOWS

Great virtual learning today…very helpful and I enjoyed exploring on my own. It was helpful with doctor’s appointment because I was able to continue working and participating in class. [This is a testament to the power of virtual learning; anytime, anywhere.]

How will I find time for all the cool things I want to try??? [What a great problem to have, right!?!]

The hands on learning aspect. [When asked what was the most satisfying part of the day’s learning experience – This is a huge glow since the learning was all virtual and we were never face to face.]

Being able to choose sessions to work on in groups was helpful. [It was nice to know that allowing choice also promoted collaborative work among participants.]

I enjoyed being able to explore on my own but having Tavia available at certain times for questions. and Tavia was great and allowed for plenty of time to explore resources and work at our own pace. [This illustrates the importance of the work/drop in sessions being an actual scheduled session during the event.]

GROWS (summarized from feedback)

  • Not enough time to absorb content
  • Too much choice
  • More sessions that offer concrete, tutorial style help (live sessions with Tavia)
  • Screencasts or video tutorials for all sessions in addition to the activities and information provided
  • Activities were too dense
  • Less scheduled sessions and more work time

The grows aren’t always easy to read, especially when you’ve been working with a district and understand more about the context of why many participants feel the way they do. While I know that many of these teachers have never had day long, hands-on PD that required critical thinking and creativity, I have to view their comments and feedback with the lens of improving this virtual PD model. In other words, I can’t get hung up on the “why” of the comment itself.

From the evaluation feedback it’s clear that participants are eager for more live sessions with me (a facilitator). Most didn’t complain about the length of time of the sessions, since there was work time built in afterwards, but having the facilitator there, working with them is important to them. In considering this, I will make more of an effort during future events to schedule less sessions and make more of them live. Zoom’s limitation is that I can only run one session at a time, which has me considering collaborating with colleagues and also the prospect of using a district’s own educators to help run sessions. The idea of utilizing capacity that is already there and helping to give these educators a platform to pursue this type of leadership experience really excites me.

The feedback also reminds me that most of the time, less is more. While I focused heavily on giving my participants a lot of choice in topics, their evaluation feedback proves that many would have enjoyed less choice and longer, more focused work time. In the future, I will consider ways expand my thinking on how to gather and collect data about what specific topics they’d liked covered, rather than use previous evaluation suggestions. I am also aware of the power of video and screencasts to help participants who opt for a work at your own pace session. I thought most of the participants who consider themselves less tech savvy would attend the live sessions, while many of them ended up doing the other choices. These work at your own pace sessions weren’t scaffold enough for all learning levels, and an easy fix is adding in video, whether it’s a tutorial or just me (the facilitator) giving them clear, concise directions on how to proceed. After reviewing the feedback, this need seemed so obvious and I honestly couldn’t believe I left it out.

Even though there is much room for improvement, I consider this first attempt at a virtual PD event, customized to the school district, to be a success. As I work on this hybrid model of face to face PD and virtual learning events, I have much to consider (including all of the above). I will think about ways to not only customize, but to also use virtual events to network districts that feel isolated. I would love to be able to have two or three districts participate so that they can not only learn individually, but learn from each other. I also want to better utilize some of Zoom’s features during the live sessions – features such as breakout rooms. Another idea that I have for making these types of virtual learning experiences better for participants is to utilize their own capacity. I would love to have educators within the district leading sessions and sharing ideas with each other. Not only does this promote leadership, it also helps to build educator confidence, something we don’t talk about enough.