Graphics Programs Reference
In-Depth Information
they will become a temporary fashion instead of
a maintained fact” (p. 237). Consequently, digital
portfolios should be carefully designed and thor-
oughly measured.
Finally, for the purpose of this chapter, we will
describe below the analytical online activities
that were available for monitoring and measur-
ing FPL in our e-development courses (Alegre
& Villar, 2006).
development”, although the meaning of advance
here is a little vague and diffuse.
In this paragraph, we report on frameworks of
FPL concepts, conditions and practices. Especially
important are staff professional development
models that allow scholars to conduct research
and evaluations. We consider the prior work of Pill
(2005, pp. 176-81) who classified FPL models as:
(a) reflective practitioner, (b) action research, (c)
novice to expert, and (d) metacognitive approach.
There are several broad teacher development
research frameworks (e.g., Effective Learning
Models and Frameworks to Design Professional
Development) which provide insights for FPL: (a)
the five phases of staff development, developed by
the North Central Regional Educational Labora-
tory, (b) the five models of professional develop-
ment, developed by Sparks and Loucks-Horsley
(1989), (c) the learning cycle by Loucks-Horsley
(1995), (d) the systemic planning process: initia-
tion and readiness, implementation, and institu-
tionalization, (e) the framework for designing
effective professional development, developed
by Cook and Rasmussen (1994), and (f) the
Concerns-Based Adoption Model (Hall & Loucks,
1979) (to view the models, see North Central Re-
gional Educational Laboratory.
Effective Learning
Models and Frameworks to Design Professional
Development
. http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/
issues/educatrs/profdevl/pd2effec.htm).
Within FPL programs, we identify the follow-
ing elements:
Professional Development Programs
In framing this consideration of success in faculty
professional development, one needs to consider
how to define a faculty programs. Any teacher
development program should examine conceptual
and empirical data in order to establish a policy
action. Consequently, the study of models of
FPL is a priority in order to provide guidance in
planning comprehensive and systemic staff pro-
fessional development. Besides, FPL programs
should demonstrate success in a multitude of ways
including change of faculty beliefs,
enaction
and
reflection
(Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002, p. 954)
in field-based evaluation, classroom practice and
other outcomes (i.e., student learning and satisfac-
tion). This is consistent with evidence in support
of faculty professional development that is closely
aligned with improving students' outcomes. We
agree with researchers Penuel et al. (2007, p.
953) when they conclude: “We agree with policy
makers who argue that such studies are needed,
and we also believe that the ultimate measure of
success for any educational reform or professional
development program is whether it leads to im-
provements in students' learning”. Consistent with
these findings, we draw on multiple sources of
data (e.g., students' perceptions of the classroom
learning climate) for the contribution of hybrid
courses for FPL programs (Villar & Alegre, 2008).
However, Pittas (2000, p. 97) adopted a different
viewpoint, assuming other links between forma-
tive variables: “The ultimate test of assessment
is whether it advances faculty and institutional
(1)
Design of accurate, current, and substantial
content
. It is especially important to conduct
a survey of academic staff needs that allows
researchers to know their curriculum and
instructional weaknesses. For instance, the
aim of the faculty program undertaken by
Bennett and Bennett (2003) was to increase
the usage of the course management system,
Blackboard 5.0, in classroom-based courses.
The researchers concluded their study: “In
order to achieve this level of penetration,
Search WWH ::
Custom Search