The administrator stated:
I think our school meets teacher’s needs quite well. We have Classrooms for the
Future coaches and the technology necessary. We have the staff that helps us
figure out how to integrate new techniques in the classroom. There is a lot of
collaboration between staff members, a lot of in-services on how to differentiate
and incorporate 21 st century learning skills.
Teacher 1 shared:
The coaching model is so much better than the “one stop shop” in-services.
Teacher 2 agreed:
The coaching model is invaluable because there is a learning curve in attempting
new techniques with technology.
When asked to comment about the existence of a professional development
model, teachers agreed coaching is better than the traditional in-service. The coaching
was used for technical support as teachers begin to use more technology devices that the
school acquired through the grant. However, genuine 21 st century learning (3 R’s) of
increasing thinking skills (rigor), engaging students through an authentic learning
approach (relevance) with the integration of technology tools (resources) is a shift in the
instructional approach. Therefore, teachers are not receiving support to initiate those
changes in their classrooms. There were strong sentiments of frustration on the part of the
teachers due to the unclear definition of school’s vision and district expectations for
teacher performance. This lack of focus was supported by Teacher 3’s response.