This study involved an examination of concepts of the theoretical framework as introduced in Chapter 1. My personal connection to the research came from my experience both as a teacher and as an administrator especially as related to my experience of
professional development. As a teacher, I spent many hours in professional development through workshops, seminars and graduate level coursework. The decisions that
administrators made about my own attendance and my subsequent reflections about that attendance, either with other educators or with school leaders, were varied. In working with teachers as a leader, I had awareness that there are many ways to approach the continuing education of teachers. Specifically, that awareness included following policies or procedures derived by our diocesan leaders concerning professional development, recognizing what my own school needed with an academic and cultural focus, and acknowledging the opinions and insights of the teachers in my school context as well as giving opportunities for reflection about their own experiences of professional development. As noted in the review of the literature, because of various factors, leaders may disregard the use of social justice values as a priority in making decisions about professional development. This was addressed in this qualitative study, and the review was delimited to variables of decision making especially pertaining to teachers and leaders. By incorporating social justice as a lens, the review of literature provided insight to other administrators and teacher leaders about professional development decisions. Because the purpose of the study was to understand the perceptions of teachers about the decision making of leaders the review included the influence of organizational behavior, leadership practices, and the voices of teachers on these decisions
and review methods of reframing professional development for teachers in regard to these decisions while looking through the lens of social justice. Upon deep reflection of the review of the research in regard to the purpose of the study, I asserted that in order to create meaning for teachers in a socially just manner, leaders should acknowledge the perceptions of teachers when making decisions about professional development.
The research questions presented in Chapter 1 included one question of significance that is addressed through the review of the literature: How do teachers perceive their
professional development experiences? Moreover, the review addressed questions concerning the sustainability of student achievement through professional development decisions promoted by the organizational policies of the diocese. Additionally, issues of social justice regarding the viewpoints of teachers were examined. Lastly, reframing of professional development to reflect social justice in an attempt to sustain professional growth was addressed in the review of the literature. My research studied whether teachers perceive that these issues are being addressed in a meaningful manner.
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to describe the perception of professional development experiences as noted by elementary teachers in a Catholic school setting. The review of the literature revealed that in order for leaders to create meaning in professional development experiences, the power of social justice could be a factor for leaders and organizations. The influence of organizational behavior and leadership practices in regard to decision making about meaningful professional development was noted in the analysis of research. Equally important, voices and the reframing of professional
development were examined in the review. Paying attention to the voices and perceptions of teachers could lead to a more socially just approach to reframing professional development.
Decision making regarding professional development by leaders deserved attention because of the present universal nature of the call in education for organizational reform. Each year, almost three million teachers participated in professional development to help them improve, transform, and respond to their own classroom contexts (Gimbel, Lopes & Greer, 2011; Johnston & Louveouzo, 2009).Despite these organizational demands, Sparks and Hirsh (2000) reported in their national study on professional development, that most school districts allocate only about one percent of their budget to professional development of their staff. Limited resources are a concern for leaders in making decisions about
professional development. For instance, noting increasing enrollment demands in both public and Catholic schools, the National Center for Educational Statistics (2011) reported that teachers often do not receive release time, lack resources, and do not receive credit for their time spent in professional development. Additionally, Berg (2010) noted that almost half of the teachers he surveyed in a quantitative study did not think that professional development in their schools or districts was useful. Lucilio (2009) reported that the current workforce of teachers averages 14.5 years of teaching and remarks that their teaching preparation could not have prepared them for skills they need today. Because of the combination of the demands of organizational reform as well as limited funding resources, regard for the perceptions of teachers in decisions about professional development may not be acknowledged by leaders.
From a social justice viewpoint, teachers‘ perceptions could be included in the design and implementation of professional development. As demonstrated by Lucilio‘s (2009) study, teachers want to be asked what they need. However, teachers may prefer content- based professional development opportunities. In support, Simon and Black‘s (2011)
quantitative study reported that 59% of teachers found professional development in content areas to be useful, and 50% of teachers found other types of professional development to be useful (Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson, Orphanos, 2009; Smith & Desimone, 2003). However, a replicated national survey indicated that only about half of professional development learning experiences focus on content (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman & Yoon, 2001; Hochberg & Desimone, 2010). Furthermore, commercialism in the school improvement market has become a multi-million dollar business (Hargreaves, 2007; Rowan, 2001). For example, the formulation of textbooks, software, training guides, and the use of educational consultants are designed by businesses to put profit before teacher development (Hargreaves, 2007). By reflecting on the reality that organizational decision making may be driven by business practices, leaders could gain awareness about factors that may discount meaning and may help to promote the use of social justice values as a priority by attending to the perceptions of teachers about the objectives of the professional development offerings.
The scholarly significance of the research was to promote understanding for university level advisors and educators, district leaders, and school leaders about organizational and administrative support for leaders in their professional development decisions related to the perceptions of teachers. Certainly, organizational support is the primary reason that professional training can be effective (Joo, Lim & Park, 2011). However, teacher contexts are often in conflict with top-down initiatives, and as a result, teachers may experience punitive measures if the choice is not to comply with standardized rules (Kesson & Henderson, 2010). In a socially just manner, administrative decisions pertaining to professional development could recognize the cultural context of a school, acknowledge teachers‘ needs, and avoid trends that ignore the challenge of teaching in a democratic
manner (Kesson & Henderson, 2010). Administrators could benefit from this study by gaining additional understanding of the meaning and perceptions of how their decisions about professional development affect teacher and student growth.
In this light, the social justice theory of leadership as it pertains to teachers‘ perceptions regarding decision making by administrators was discussed in the review of literature. Empirical research was utilized to formulate indications of organizational
behavior, leadership practices, teacher voices, and perceptions and reframing efforts related to professional development. Textbooks and professional journals were perused to seek information about the subjects of the theoretical framework. Keyword searches in EBSCO, ERIC, and JSTOR publication databases were performed. In all, 73 books were read carefully and 166 articles were examined. Keywords in the search included ―professional development,‖ ―leadership,‖ ―teacher perceptions,‖ and ―reframing.‖ As a result, sufficient empirical research was obtained for the review. The review of the literature, with the support of this empirical research, was developed as a theoretical framework in four sections:
organizational behavior, leadership practices, teachers‘ voices, and reframing professional development. Each of these topics utilized social justice theory as a lens in reviewing the literature pertaining to decisions made about professional development.
A leader typically helps to create knowledge in an organization through decision making practices. According to Meister (2010), administrators can facilitate change in schools by engaging faculty in discussions regarding innovations and goals. Utilizing the social justice theory in combination with analyzing teacher learning and development, the research examined how leaders can use individual and organizational justice to help teachers guide students to achieve (Beachum, 2008). In a replicated survey study, teachers indicated
that the three core features of professional development, which have a positive impact in their own contexts, were changes in content knowledge, active learning, and coherence with research-based learning activities (Garet et al., 2001; Hochberg & Desimone, 2010). But teachers are evaluated according to students‘ progress, and excellent teachers are perceived as those whose students make the greatest gains (Hoerr, 2011). Guskey (2009) suggested that administrators should start making professional development decisions, not by making decisions in terms of accountability but by creating avenues for serious discussion about the specific goals of the activity, reflections on how achievement will be attained through these goals, and how that evidence will be gathered in order to critically evaluate the training. Through the use of practices of social justice, a leader may help advance both teacher and student growth.
The review of the literature was delimited to the phenomenon of professional development and centered on variables that pertain to decision making for teachers and leaders, namely, organizational behavior, leadership practices, the voices of teachers, and reframing of professional development. The definition of professional development, as noted in scholarly literature and as utilized in this study, was to build content knowledge and capacity for skills that improve student performance (Hochberg & Desimone, 2010). As defined, successful professional development was both purposeful and sustainable
(Hargreaves, 2007). With this definition in mind, the review of the literature began with an analysis of social justice theory as related to the purpose and meaning of teacher
development and learning. The social justice theory mirrored social justice education in which the call for social justice is a call to prepare teachers for diversity in their workplace, with their students, and with their peers (Sales, Traver & Garcia, 2011). Pertaining to
professional development decisions, embracing this theory, social justice leaders set aside traditional bureaucratic thinking that limits the concept of leadership, and instead look to formulating organizations that uphold empowerment and equity (Marshall & Oliva, 2010). However, the review of the literature differentiated this call and asked whether leaders are cognizant of teachers‘ perceptions and the meaningfulness of professional development offerings, especially how well educators are prepared for teaching in the contexts of their districts and schools.
There were four important variables in the theoretical framework for leaders in the decision making process regarding professional development. As a topic in the review of the literature, the first variable was organizational behavior. Although hierarchical structures as well as individuals in an organization can promote the dominance of power, struggles for power can be converted to attempts to share power in a socially just mindset (Foucault, 1977). Socially just organizational behavior required a mindfulness in institutions that enabled stakeholders to be fully informed through the use of critical analysis to evaluate ideas, problems, and policies, the awareness of the welfare of others and the common good, and the concern for the dignity and rights of all people (Moos, 2008). Next, the principles of leadership practices that pertain to teachers experiencing professional development were emphasized in the review included inclusiveness in policy making, equal availability of understanding, and universal access of professional development (Laguardia & Pearl, 2009). Also, the concept of voices, as a variable in the study, was defined as assurance that
stakeholders‘ interests are being addressed through transformative professional development that changes the social and historical context of an organization by becoming dialogic in nature (Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Jean-Marie, Normore & Brooks, 2009). As
demonstrated by the research, teachers reported that learning occurred when they felt supported through creative and reflective frameworks of professional development (Watson & Manning, 2008). Lastly, the variable of reframing professional development was defined as reworking decision making to help to sustain teacher growth. Each of these variables in the review of the literature helped to examine the perceptions of teachers for decisions of professional development made by leaders.
The phenomenon of professional development has a history in scholarly research. The goal of teacher transformation, in which professional development is deemed long-term, consistent, in-depth, and provides collegiality, was initially explored in Levine‘s (1989) work. As a connection to Dewey‘s (1937) work, Glickman (1998) argued that professional development decisions should be democratically made with leadership formulating decisions based on equality, liberty, and responsiveness to the needs of teachers. In Little‘s (1993) treatise on educational reform, he remarked that professional development should have the capacity to help teachers to formulate, implement, and critique reforms. However, Little (1993) also reported that professional development is often based on political agendas that are weak in substance. Other factors addressed in a classic study of professional development were decisions that confront inequity including socially generated constraints, political influence, social class distinctions, and the changing nature of the classroom workplace (Guskey & Huberman, 1995). In this light, the amount of money that is spent on professional development may be wasted on superficial or fragmented workshops that may not connect with curriculum and learning (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Gabriel, 2011). In Speck‘s (1996) research on best practices, he suggested that administrators should examine professional development as a process that is diverse and that administrators should promote educator
involvement. According to Kelchtermans and Vandenberghe‘s (1996) study, professional development could be a lifelong learning process oriented throughout a teacher‘s career. These classic and landmark studies support analyzing professional development within the scope of social justice theory, because each researcher speaks to some form of teacher involvement when making choices about professional development.
Other more recent scholarly studies included compelling research about the
significance of professional development about both teacher and student growth. In support, Kedro and Short‘s (2004) study of long-term professional development found that the longer the model is in place, the more teachers responded that they had received adequate training. Other studies contended that professional development could be viewed as lifelong learning which enhances the social and democratic participation of humanity in the workforce (Basharat, Iqbal & Bibi, 2011; Fenwick, 2004). Noting the importance of professional development in achievement, Sparks and Hirsh (2000) reported that two-thirds of teachers used three or more activities introduced in professional development compared with a third who did not receive professional development. The Urban Institute (Clewell et al., 2004) suggested that professional development should be linked to curriculum knowledge and to how students learn. Accordingly, competencies such as content knowledge influenced
practice and were enhanced by professional development (Kaslow, 2004; Stoltenberg, 2005). Instead of providing training in techniques or classroom management for teachers,
administrators look to features of professional development that promoted academic growth such as focusing on content, creating coherence, enacting sustainability, and responding to contextual factors (Hochberg & Desimone, 2010; Schlechty, 2002). According to a study by Williams, Tabernik and Krivak (2009), targeted professional development promotes
improvement gains in achievement as measured by student performance. Opposite of the focus on reform and accountability, recent research revealed that the focus of professional development should be to respond to diversity by creating professional development opportunities that speak to the need for inclusive district, school, and classroom practices (Kose & Lim, 2010). However, Fauske and Raybould (2005) posited that organizational structures in schools do not provide opportunities for educators to interact and share understanding. In support of these findings, Marshall and Oliva (2010) agreed that some policies and decisions about professional development do not utilize social justice methods in the development of teachers. Lindstrom and Speck (2004), in their landmark study, created a rubric for high quality professional development that included both focus on content
knowledge and focus on collaboration and sharing. In response to these studies, professional development could be seen as having impact for teacher and student growth when socially just methods of involvement are embraced by leaders.
Professional development, as a general subject area, had sufficient resources to inform the review. Additionally, the theory of social justice was the subject of over 30 recent articles or books. There was abundant research on leadership and leadership theories,
including over 50 combined resources of books and article. Also, the theoretical framework for organizational behavior allocated many resources for utilization in the study. Alternatives to reframing professional development also contained many recent resources helping to inform the research.
However, the themes of teacher perception and leadership practices of social justice as related to teachers had fewer entries and encouraged the need for the study. While there were sufficient entries for professional development, perceptions or research involving
teachers beyond pre-teaching or first year teaching were also lacking. For instance, there were only 11 studies in the examination of the overall literature that gave an indication of teacher perception, and these studies were only within the spectrum of mathematic or science content teaching or content professional development. Indeed, only one article addressed the teacher perception of administrative decision making, and this literature was in the context of teacher growth. Because the literature exhibits gaps in these areas, the need for this study was apparent, was warranted, and was necessary for both administrators and educators.
With these research results in mind, the procedures used for collecting and analyzing data included perusing each book or article for ideas that supported the theoretical
framework. The goal of the literature review was to be substantive and thorough (Bootes & Belle, 2005). In addition, the notes led to a basis for the conceptual schema, which included the factors that contribute to the phenomenon. In development of the review, the researcher followed a format of noting the most important arguments and counter arguments, down to the least important arguments and counter arguments (Foss, 2002). So as a rule, definitions of terms were depicted in the notes, the notes were either taken directly or summarized, and notes included source information. As a result, the procurement of notes helped to distinguish gaps in the literature.
The paper was organized through the lens of social justice as it pertains to organizational behavior, leadership practices, voices, and reframing of professional development. Primarily, the theoretical framework contained a construct which was an examination of organizational behavior as related to social justice theory including the variables of the influence of organizational behavior, reform, growth, and achievement on policies and procedures that lead to decision making about professional development. Next,
as a construct of the theoretical framework, there was a link between the theory of social justice to leadership, including an examination of variables of leadership practices, democratic education, power, and change. Also, another construct of the theoretical framework was the voices of teachers with subtopics that included contexts, trust, and
participation which played a key role because of the lack of abundant research in the analysis of the literature. Lastly, the framework included literature supporting the reframing of
professional development using subtopics of care, collaboration, and alternative structures