Abstract:

Many professional learning (PL) models have been created to help math teachers learn specific content and teaching strategies, or to allow time for collaboration and goal-setting, all in line with recommended practices. Research indicates that certain PL models effectively assist in teacher learning and student achievement. Yet, studies on the effects and structure of PL have yielded conflicting findings. This may be because it is challenging to learn new content and adapt instructional strategies and many of these studies do not examine long-term learning. Exploring teachers' long-term learning can offer new insights into PL effectiveness. This study was guided by the following research questions: 1. What are the long-term impacts of professional learning experiences on teachers' classroom practices, 4-5 years down the line? 2. What do teachers attribute their sustained uptake to from the PL experience?

The theoretical framework used to guide the study was related to the adaptive/specified PL continuum. Adaptive PL models exist on one end of the continuum, where learning goals and resources are based on the local context, the group’s perceived needs and shared artifacts from participating teachers' classrooms. In contrast, specified PL models include published materials that outline teacher learning goals, pedagogical goals, and offer resources for implementation. This study analyzed three PLs located at various points of the continuum to better understand PL design features that influence sustained teacher learning.

Data were collected from 18 case study teachers that participated in the three different PLs. We collected 6 classroom videos and conducted 4 semi-structured interviews with each teacher 4-5 years after they attended the PL. The interviews focused on the teachers’ current teaching practices, beliefs, and experience in the PL. The teachers also discussed video clips they selected as evidence of uptake related to their learning from PL.

Two researchers independently coded the data for evidence of content, pedagogy and resources from the PLs that the teachers mentioned and used in their classrooms. The team then met to discuss salient themes that emerged. Next, data was analyzed using AILYZE, a new AI tool for qualitative research. We inputted the transcripts and research questions into AILYZE, and it pinpointed key themes based on the interview transcripts. AILYZE provided answers to our questions for each participant and for groups of participants and backed up its answers with direct quotes, which we checked for biases. We then used these insights to validate our team's conclusions and identify oversights.

Findings from our analysis included:
1. Teachers who participated in specified PLs implemented specific content, resources and pedagogy 4-5 years after their participation in ways that aligned with the goals and intentions of the PL and
2. Teachers who participated in adaptive PL highlighted the community and collaboration that was developed but they were less clear about the specific ways in which their instruction changed over time.

This study contributes to the understanding of teacher learning from participating in different PL models over time and the significant, ongoing impact of PL on teachers’ practice. Elucidating the differences between teacher learning in specified PL versus adaptive PL has the potential to support teacher leaders, school districts and teachers in selecting appropriate PL models.

Keywords:

Mathematics, professional learning, education.