Component 2: Professional Development
 | |
| |
| |
|
Cohort 1: 2000-2001 Monthly Professional Development Activities |
| |
| |
| |
|
Goals
of Professional Development
The ultimate goal of Urban Dreams is long-term improvement in student achievement. The major vehicle for accomplishing this goal is through on-going professional development. Emphasis has been on meeting the needs of classroom teachers, encouraging collaborative efforts, infusing technology into curriculum, and fostering interdisciplinary, multicultural curricula reflecting the themes of human and civil rights. Substantial progress has been made in meeting the professional development objectives in accordance with the original proposal.
The three goals of the program’s professional development are:
|
Curriculum development with emphasis on technology integration |
|
Content knowledge enhancement |
|
|
The four channels used to accomplish these goals are:
|
Summer institutes |
|
Monthly workshops |
|
Classroom technology assistance |
|
In-class coaching/mentoring/collaboration by Urban Dreams staff |
The teacher professional development cohort model provides year-round training for cohorts of approximately 50 secondary language arts and social studies teachers. The project is currently serving two cohorts of teachers. The cornerstone of the model is an initial two-week summer institute that integrates technology training with language arts and social studies. The trainings are done in conjunction with partner projects based at the University of California, Berkeley, Stanford University, and The World Affairs Council of Northern California. In addition, Urban Dreams has contracted with individuals and groups who have expertise in technology and content connected to the project's themes of human and civil rights.
Six urban high schools and three alternative high schools are the target of the Urban Dreams project. Within each of these schools, all English and social studies teachers were afforded the opportunity to participate in staff development activities – a total of 100 have participated thus far. A total of 52 formally joined Cohort 1 (2000-2001) and received classroom equipment. Forty-eight more teachers joined Cohort 2 and 30 participated in the Summer Institute (see below). Table 1 provides an overview of the participating high schools as well as the number of target teachers per site in each year of the project.
Table 1:
Participating Schools and Number of Target Teachers
|
School |
2000
– 2001 Cohort
1 |
2001-2002 Cohort
2 |
Totals |
|
Castlemont |
2 |
8 |
10 |
|
Dewey High |
2 |
4 |
6 |
|
Far West |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
Fremont |
13 |
6 |
19 |
|
McClymonds |
5 |
3 |
8 |
|
Oakland High |
11 |
4 |
15 |
|
Street Academy |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
Skyline |
8 |
14 |
22 |
|
Oakland Tech. |
8 |
7 |
15 |
|
Totals |
52 |
48 |
100 |
Cohort 1: 2000 Summer Institute
Urban Dreams recruited 52 teachers to be members of Cohort 1 and 36 participated in the intensive two-week (July 17-July 28) 2000 Summer Institute. One of the overarching goals of the Summer Institute was to begin, among teachers of history and English (grades 9-12), an on-going conversation about the integration of content, technology, literacy and instruction. Secondly, the Summer Institute focused on how teaching and learning about human and civil rights can be integrated into the classroom.
The Summer Institute was designed to:
|
Include presentations by individuals and partner projects that focused on helping teachers and students enhance and deepen their content knowledge; |
|
Provide training in the use of the equipment teachers received for their professional use (laptop computer) and for their classroom (five computers, T.V./V.C.R. and printer); |
|
Include presentations from teachers that made connections between content, technology, and instruction designed to improve students’ skills in reading and writing expository text; |
|
Provide teacher participants time to develop materials and lessons to use in their classrooms during the 2000-2001 school year |
|
Provide participants, partner projects, and urban dreams staff time to develop plans for how to best work together throughout the 2000-2001 school year. |
A major goal of the Summer Institute was to foster a professional learning environment while simultaneously building a greater knowledge base of the content presented. Summer Institute participants were also provided with a number of books related to human and civil rights, as well as best instructional practices. Throughout the two weeks, participants were asked to read excerpts from the following books:
|
Call & Response: The Riverside Anthology of the African
American Literary |
|
Reading for Understanding: A Guide to Improving Reading in
Middle and High School Classrooms by Schoenback, Greenleaf, Cziko, Hurwitz |
|
Writing and Thinking with Computers – A Practical and
Progressive Approach by Monroe |
|
A Map of Hope – Women’s Writing on Human Rights: An
International Literary Anthology edited by Agosin |
|
A Different Mirror – A History of Multicultural America by
Takaki |
|
The Eyes on the Prize – Civil Rights Reader edited by Carson,
Garrow, Gill, Harding, Hine |
The following table provides an overview of the daily schedule over the two weeks of the 2000 Summer Institute:
Table 4: 2000 Summer Institute Schedule
|
Monday
7/17 |
Tuesday
7/18 |
Wednesday
7/19 |
Thursday
7/20 |
Friday
7/21 |
|
A.M. -Welcomes, Introductions -Keynote Speaker- Clayborne Carson, Director MLK
Jr. Papers Project, Stanford University -Malika Herd- working with the King Papers at Oakland High, looking at a
pilot project |
A.M. -Laptop distribution,
including: e-mail
set-up and tech presentation on care and maintenance of laptops |
A.M. -Deborah
Juarez – Fremont High School Alison McDonald- Fremont High School “Expository Reading and Writing: Beginning a Conversation” |
A.M. -“California Heritage” –Images and Documents from UC Berkeley’s
Bancroft Library and the “American Memory” Collection from the
Library of Congress |
A.M. -Tech
Training –The Gale Group- Online resources “History Resource Center” “Discovering U.S., World, & Multicultural History” “Contemporary Authors” “Twayne’s Complete Set” “Scribner’s Writer Series” |
|
P.M. -Overview of Summer Institute -
Background and goals of Urban Dreams -
Expectations of participants -
Working in study groups |
P.M. -English
teachers-
Teaching from the Core literature list and the anthologies- connections
between teaching and standards History teachers- Textbooks: connections between content, technology, textbooks, and
district standards |
P.M. -Expository reading and writing continued- subject area discussions Study group meeting |
P.M. -Netsearching- exploring information connected to essential questions,
course content, and curriculum project |
P.M. -Tech Training- Exploration, Coaching, Project Development -
Introduction to using “Inspiration” application software -
Introduction to using “Access” database in English and History
lessons |
|
Monday
7/24 |
Tuesday
7/25 |
Wednesday
7/26 |
Thursday
7/27 |
Friday
7/28 |
|
A.M. -Isaac Mankita, Project Coordinator, Center for Latin American Studies,
University of California |
A.M. -Pat Hill, University of San Francisco, General Editor of Call &
Response: The Riverside Anthology of the African American Literary
Tradition |
A.M. -Julianne Traylor – Chair of Amnesty International Board of Directors |
A.M. -Planning time Study group
meeting |
A.M. -Tech Training- Individual troubleshooting -Intro. To PowerPoint application program |
|
P.M. -History Teachers – Contemporary
World History Project/World Affairs Council – “Global
Negotiations” – Online simulation English Teachers – Planning/discussion time |
P.M. -Harry
Kreisler and Nanou Matteson, University of California, Berkeley “Connecting Students to the World” |
P.M. -Introducing classroom set-ups Study group
meeting |
P.M. -Planning year long follow-up |
P.M. -Tech Training- Introduction to using “Access” database English and History lessons |
Observations conducted by the evaluators during the first week of the 2000 Summer Institute revealed that: a) teachers were actively engaged in professional dialog with each other not only about curriculum content, but how to integrate the technology into everyday instructional practices; b) using newly acquired Internet resources, teachers were able to access other teachers’ works and to see how literature was being used to develop curriculum; and c) teachers were clearly beginning to articulate how technology can assist them in networking with other professionals.
Cohort 1: 2000-2001 Monthly Professional Development Activities
In addition to the 2000 Summer Institute, the project sponsored monthly ongoing workshops to assist teachers with integrating technology into their curriculum. The workshops were held in conjunction with the collaborative partners who provided direct input and resources to the project. The workshops were held in the Technology Learning Center and the partner locations. They featured presentations from these major agency and university partners including: Stanford University, Marcus A. Foster Educational Institute, Lightspan, World Affairs Council, Bay Area Writing Project; and U.C. Berkeley. The calendar for the 2000-2001 year (Table 5) shows the variety, frequency, and type of activities that are scheduled. This table is a brief description of some of the major collaboration activities.
The following is a brief description of the collaborating partners who participated in the monthly workshops:
|
The Martin Luther King Jr. Papers Project (MLK Project), Stanford University: The King Papers Project is a major research effort to assemble and disseminate historical information concerning Martin Luther King, Jr. and the social movements in which he participated. Urban Dream teachers collaborated with the King Papers Project to develop curriculum for secondary teachers. |
The curriculum “There Was a Certain Type of Fire That No Water Could Put Out” was created and refined through these efforts. Collaborations between OUSD teachers and Stanford students resulted in units developed in web page format. Examples are the “Music of the Civil Rights Movement” and Urban Economics.” Students at Stanford got real time exposure to urban classrooms and teachers got rich resource sets to use with their students.
|
The Center for Latin American Studies (CLAS): California Heritage and the Center for Latin American Studies assisted individual teachers with the development of curriculum related to Latin America. Cal Heritage staff visited classrooms to display their resources that are available to teachers and students. Both Cal Heritage and CLAS, in collaboration with project and district staff, developed web-based curriculum resources. |
|
California Heritage,
(Cal Heritage): The
California Heritage Collection is an online archive of over 28,000 digital
images and manuscripts documenting California's history and culture.
This project is a collaborative effort between the Berkeley Library,
University of California, Berkeley and the San Francisco and Oakland Unified
School Districts. The goals of the California Heritage Collection are to: a)
promote the integration of the Internet and primary sources into K-12
curriculum; and b) create web-based lesson plans. The web-based lesson plans that resulted from the individual
school projects can be found at http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/calheritage/k12,
and include units on farm workers and the United Farm Workers movement.
Teachers worked with librarians to learn to use the restricted
collections and correct procedures surrounding copyright issues. |
|
U.C. Berkeley “Connecting Students to the World” (CSTW): Connecting Students to the World is an educational program developed and produced by the Institute of International Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. The program uses the Internet and the World Wide Web to further collaboration between the university and K-12 educators. At the heart of the program is “Conversations with History”, which features interviews with distinguished men and women from all over the world who talk about their lives and their work. This project has an updated website and has added new interviews, model lessons, and planning guides for both teachers and students. |
|
The Core Literature Study Group (Core Lit): The Core Literature Study Group is an organization of teachers that meet to develop curriculum and materials for the teaching of a specific title from the core literature list. The goal of the meetings is to publish curriculum projects on the Urban Dreams web site. Two Fremont High School teachers, Emily Filloy and Deborah Juarez, coordinated the group. |
|
Bay Area Writing Project
(BAWP): The Bay Area Writing Project is a
collaborative program of the University of California at Berkeley and Bay Area
schools, dedicated to improving writing and the teaching of writing at all grade
levels and in all disciplines. The project includes an expanding network of
exemplary classroom teachers, kindergarten through university, who, throughout
the summer and school year, conducted professional development programs for
teachers and administrators. The
project component featured during the 2000-2001 academic year was “Expository
Writing in the History and English Classrooms.” |
|
World Affairs Council (WAC)
Human Rights Series:
The World Affairs Council Education Program provides teachers with
international studies resources and information. Innovative methods for
implementing related classroom curriculum are discussed at the workshops and
programs which include seminar series, school district projects, scholarships
for both teachers and students, institutes, a Resource Center, and the Colloquy
newsletter. Work with this project
began during the 2000 Summer Institute and continued in 2001. |
Cohort 1: 2001 Expository Writing Workshop
The project sponsored a one-week expository writing
workshop in July of 2001. The
writing workshop was designed to give Cohort 1 teachers the opportunity to
reflect on the first year of implementation and/or further develop specific
curriculum projects. The following table provides an overview of the Institute’s daily
schedule for the Cohort I Expository Writing Workshop for Summer 2001.
Table 6a: Cohort 1
Expository Writing Workshop - Summer 2001
|
Monday
7/9 |
Tuesday
7/10 |
Wednesday
7/11 |
Thursday
7/12 |
Friday
7/13 |
|
A.M. Welcome and
Introductions Agenda and goals
for the week - expectations, questions, connections to standards. Participants
discuss what they will be working on. A quick view of
the Urban Dreams Website. Writing Time
(10:30-12:00) |
A.M. Discussion of
curriculum model - "What Does
it Means to Be an American? Group Meeting/ Writing Time |
A.M. Writing Time |
A.M. Discussion of
reading "Alice
Walker in the Classroom" Writing Time Lunch provided |
A.M.
Group Meeting/ Writing Time |
|
P.M. Writing Time 3:00 - Check-in |
P.M. Writing Time 3:00 - Check-in |
P.M. Group Meeting/ Writing Time 3:00 - Check-in |
P.M. Discussion of
reading - "Diving
With Whales: Five Reasons for Practitioners to Write for
Publication" Writing Time 3:00 - Check-in |
P.M. Works-in-Progress
– Readings/Discussion Planning for the
2001-2002 school year - what next? |
The evaluators developed an exit survey for participants in the one-week Expository Writing Workshop. Table 6b provides an overview of the exit survey results:
Table 6b: Cohort 1 Expository Writing Workshop - Summer 2001
|
|
Agree |
Somewhat
Agree |
Neutral |
Somewhat
Disagree |
Disagree |
N |
|
My time spent
this week was worthwhile |
100.00% |
|
|
|
|
17 |
|
The staff
provided the technical assistance I needed |
94.12% |
|
5.88% |
|
|
17 |
|
The
technological and instructional resources were beneficial |
82.35% |
|
17.65% |
|
|
17 |
|
I would
recommend this type of professional development to other colleagues |
94.12% |
5.88% |
|
|
|
17 |
Table 6b indicates that every participant found the workshop worthwhile. Nearly everyone enjoyed adequate technical assistance and would recommend this type of workshop to others. However, a significant number of the participants were more neutral as to the benefit of the provided resources.
The following are a sample of the responses given to the open ended questions for this cohort of teachers during the Expository Writing Workshop (Cohort 1 Summer 2001):
|
“The hands-on experience greatly helped me. We had at least four facilitators; people to call on for help, maybe more. I made more progress that I ever expected. |
|
“Ann Kruze and Stan Pesick have created an atmosphere enabling the ‘pursuit of truth in the company of friends.’ I learned from the others in the session. Also, the techs were a huge help in learning the new technology. This is the way to keep excellent teachers in the district and the way to learn how to excel in the classroom.” |
When asked if there was anything that could be done to improve the workshop one respondent wrote:
|
“I’m not sure. I felt I could have been somewhat more productive in terms of writing output, but I felt I was given all of the support I could hope for. |
2001 Summer Institute
A second cohort of 48 teachers was added to the Urban Dreams project beginning in July of 2001. The first major activity was the participation in the 2001 Summer Institute. The 2001 Summer Institute was planned to work with members of Cohort 2 and was based on input from Cohort 1.
Table 7a, below, provides an overview of the Cohort 2 Institute’s daily schedule over the two weeks during the summer of 2001:
Table 7a: Cohort 2 Summer Institute: 2001 - Week One
Monday 7/16
|