Relationship of Professional Development Participation to Observed Changes in Teacher Practice and Student Outcomes

Authors: Harriet Lamm, Margaret Hobson, Lee Sloan

Single Observations:  Data for the single observations produced statistical significance
(p = .000037).  This indicates that 10% of the variance in the data was the result of the amount of focused professional development and follow-up activities.  Multiple observation data (controlled for observer, grant year, and grade level) produced a statistical significant p=.003.  For the multiple observation participants, 11% of the variance in the data can be attributed to the number of professional development hours and follow-up activities.

The 244 observed teachers were divided into six different groups according to the number of professional development hours as indicated in Table 3.

An ANCOVA was conducted with the weighted average as the dependent variable and the grouped hours of professional development as the independent variable controlling for observer, grant year, and grade level.  Table 4 provides the mean and standard error for the grouped data.  Statistical significance for between-subject effects was p = .000037. 

 
The computed value of R2 was .134 with an adjusted R2 of .104 which accounts for 10% of the variance, i.e., the amount of professional development participated in accounts for 10% of the variance in the data.
Multiple Observations:  The 127 teachers with multiple observations were divided into five different groups according to the number of professional development hours as indicated in Table 5.

Controlling the multiple observations for observer, grant year, and grade level produced differences which were statistically significant p = .003.  Means and standard errors for the grouped data are provided in Table 6. 

 
The computed value of R2 was .163 with an adjusted R2 of .114 which accounts for 11% of the variance, i.e., the amount of professional development participated in accounts for 11% of the variance in the data.
Although results varied by district and campus level, AIMS districts surpassed regional comparison districts each year.  For elementary schools, the difference was significant at p < .05 in 2004 and at p < .01 for 2005-2007 (Table 7).  For middle schools and high schools, the difference was significant at p < .01 for all years (Tables 8 and 9).  Thus, results from this evaluation study support the Holler, Callender, & Skinner (2007) claim that content-based professional development increases student achievement.