University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Teacher perception on coaching and effective professional development implementation

(USC Thesis Other)

Teacher perception on coaching and effective professional development implementation

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

TEACHER PERCEPTION ON COACHING AND EFFECTIVE PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION

by

Kari M. L. Nunokawa

_________________________________________________________________

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2012

Copyright 2012 Kari M. L. Nunokawa

ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Writing this dissertation has been an incredibly emotional, gut-wrenching,
frustrating, and most importantly, rewarding experience. There are so many people
to thank for allowing me this wonderful opportunity to fulfill my educational dream
of obtaining a doctorate degree. First, I would like to thank my parents, Martin and
Kay Luna. They have provided me with guidance, support, encouragement, and
unconditional love. Those priceless intangibles have shaped me into the woman I
am today. I am so grateful to have such amazing parents. To my husband Craig,
thank you for loving me through this whole journey. Your support has been
incredible and through all of this you have remained my rock. To Hie, my darling
sunshine, thank you for allowing me to spend countless nights in class and thousands
of hours on homework, sometimes at your expense. I love you. To my Noah, thank
you for being the best little baby so mommy could still do her work. I love you. To
Dana, my writing partner and sister by choice, I could not have asked for a better
friend to go through this with. Your support, advice, encouragement, and love have
pulled me through. Kani‘au, my sister and travel partner, thank you for your
support. This journey would not have been the same without you. Thank you to my
family and friends, especially my brother, Neal, for being my sounding board and
source of confidence. To my dissertation chair, Dr. Melora Sundt, and my
dissertation committee members, Dr. Dominic Brewer and Dr. Darnell Cole, thank
you for your guidance. Your direction, support, and encouragement got me to the

iii
end. I am so grateful. To my cohort, thank you. All of you are my forever friends
and family. Each of you continues to inspire me everyday.

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ii
List of Tables v
Abstract vi
Chapter One: Introduction 1
Chapter Two: Literature Review 23
Chapter Three: Methodology 54
Chapter Four: Results 75
Figure 1. Histogram of Total SE Scores 82
Chapter Five: Discussion 92
References 112
Appendices 123
Appendix A: Pre-Test Survey 123
Appendix B: Post-Test 1 Survey 129
Appendix C: Post-Test 2 Survey 135

v
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners Training 64
Table 2: Teacher Efficacy Results from Tschannen-Moran and 68
Woolfolk-Hoy (2001)
Table 3: Research Questions, Survey Questions and Data Analysis 72
Table 4: Response Rates 76
Table 5: Sample Demographics Pre-test 77
Table 6: Sample Demographics – Post-test 1 78
Table 7: Sample Demographics – Post-test 2 79
Table 8: Participants Perception of the Professional Development Activity 80
Table 9: Pre-, Post-1, and Post-2 Scores for TSES 83
Table 10: Percentage of Participants with Correct Response 85
Table 11: Importance of Support – Post-test 1 86
Table 12: Actual Follow-up Support Received Post Training 87
Table 13: Implementation Response 89

vi
ABSTRACT
The area of professional development, within the educational setting, is
critical to on-going learning for teachers and ultimately, higher student achievement.
The literature on professional development is vast; however, the empirical research
on implementation of skills learned from the training to the classroom is lacking.
This study looked at the efficacy of the Building Foundation Reading Skills for
Diverse Learners professional development training and the application of the skills
learned from this training to the classroom. A mixed method approach was used
which included the use of interview, pre-, post-1, and post-2 surveys. There were 50
elementary school educators who worked in the Hawaii Department of Education on
the island of Oahu who participated in this training. The data collected examined
teacher efficacy, learning, and transfer of the skills and learning to the classroom.
Analyses of the data concluded that the training aligned with the goals of the
participants, increased self-reported efficacy, and also increased the knowledge base
of participants. The analyses also indicated a gap between the supports teachers
needed, the supports they expected to occur, and what they actually received on
campus. Teachers desired to have coaching support after training; however,
expected to have no support. Teachers’ expectations of no support paralleled what
occurred on campus. Interestingly, even though there was a lack of coaching support
following the training, participants reported a high confidence level in
implementation. The results and implications of those findings are discussed.

1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Educational reforms such as the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB)
and Race to the Top (2010) are setting high standards for student achievement
(Borko, 2004; Guskey, 2000). For example, NCLB (2001) specifies that all students
in the United States will be proficient in reading and math by 2014. As a result of
these increasing demands for higher student outcomes, teachers need to be prepared
to meet these standards. The job of a teacher is becoming increasingly complex; the
diverse student population, combined with the mandate that all students should be
successful puts more pressure on teachers to be able to individualize instruction to
meet the needs of all learners.
In addition to the high student achievement goals, the initiatives are also
calling for the transformation of the traditional roles and responsibilities of the
classroom teachers (Guskey, 2000). These new responsibilities extend beyond the
classroom for teachers and can also include participation in school governance
through shared decision-making, increasing use of data-driven decision-making
policies, and greater responsibility for engaging the families and communities in the
educational process (Guskey, 2000). The structure and organization of schools, new
policies, and parent and community involvement all contribute to both a changing
school culture and the redefinition of job roles and responsibilities (Guskey, 2000).
The classroom level changes that are necessary to meet these ambitious new
goals are highly dependent on having effective and highly trained teachers (Spillane,

2
1999). The importance of effective and highly trained teachers is supported by an
analysis of national survey and case study data that concludes teacher quality is
strongly related to improved student outcomes than are student demographic
characteristics, class size, and overall spending levels (Darling-Hammond, 1999).
Even further, the type of instruction needed to meet these new initiatives is not easy
and teachers simply are not able to change the way they teach just because they are
required to meet these goals (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Guskey, 2000). Ball and Cohen
(1999) state, “teachers need opportunities to reconsider their current practices and to
examine others, as well as to learn more about the subjects and students they teach”
(p. 3).
The need for effective, quality teachers is evident everywhere in the field of
education. Researchers and policy makers alike are aware of the need for teachers to
keep current with skills, strategies, and classroom practices to help increase student
achievement (Hill, 2009). One way for teachers to do this is through professional
development learning opportunities (Hill, 2009). Professional development
opportunities can assist teachers in staying on top of their craft, content, and
classroom practices. There is a wide array of professional development
opportunities including but not limited to workshops, teaching institutes, lesson
study, mentoring, coaching, team meetings, and professional learning communities
(Hill, 2007). One of the key issues that will be explored in this study is the
effectiveness of professional development. With so many offerings of professional
development for educators, it can be difficult to decipher effective and ineffective

3
professional development. This study will focus on the follow-up after a
professional development training to understand the degree to which support plays a
role in teachers’ ability to implement newly learned skills, strategies, and knowledge
in the everyday classroom.
Professional Development
Educators have, in the past, regarded professional development as something
that occurs during the few days at the start of the school year or throughout the year
as special events. Very often, teachers have not had any input into the planning of
the professional development nor do they find that the topics covered actually have
any relevance to their teaching (Guskey, 2000). Most often, educators have viewed
professional development as a means to keep up their professional certification, earn
more money on the salary scale, or just retain their jobs (Guskey, 2000; Easton,
2008). Looking in, it may be hard to see the professional development system as
troubled because nearly all teachers do participate in some kind of learning
opportunity every year and there are many publications heralding the latest
improvements in teacher education (Hill, 2009). However, the facts are dismal.
From the evidence available, teachers apparently have little use for their learning
experiences and most teachers engage in only the minimum professional
development required by their state or district each year (Hill, 2009). The National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2001), which is the primary federal entity for
collecting, analyzing, and reporting data related to education in the United States and
other nations, published the most recent data. Only about half of the teacher

4
respondents to the NCES survey reported spending a day or less in professional
development over the past year and a very small minority of teachers reported
attending four or more days within the past year. This statistic indicates that despite
the need for keeping up with national initiatives through professional development,
teachers are not actually spending the time in the trainings.
There are various types of professional development, the most common of
which include training, observation or assessment, involvement in a development or
process, study groups, inquiry/action research, individually guided activities,
mentoring, and model summary (Guskey, 2000). Each of these types has strengths
and weaknesses, and may or may not meet the needs of educators. Researchers
agree that the professional development opportunities currently offered to teachers
are inadequate and past efforts have failed because many of the opportunities for
professional development do not include the necessary components that constitute
effective professional development (Guskey, 2000; Borko, 2004; Easton, 2008).
There are many studies conducted on professional development and even
with the large amount of literature on the topic, there are relatively few quality
studies from which conclusions and characteristics of effective professional
development can be drawn (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001; Yoon,
Duncan, Lee, Scarloss, & Shapley, 2007). In a study conducted by Yoon et al.
(2007), 1,300 studies that potentially addressed the effects of professional
development on student achievement were examined. Of the 1,300 studies, only
nine of the studies actually met the evidence standards set by the What Works

5
Clearinghouse (Yoon et al., 2007). That number turns into a very dismal percentage
of empirical evidence for the number of studies actually conducted.
As mentioned above, the research currently shows there are not very many
empirically sound studies, which can substantially conclude what makes effective
professional development. The lack of effective evaluations contributes to this
problem and as a result, can contribute to the “Wal-Mart” style of programs being
offered to educators. There are many different programs out there for educators to
choose from, often without sound data-driven evidence behind the new knowledge or
skills they are marketing. The vast amount of professional development programs
being marketed all adds to the confusion for educators. Granted, there are some
programs proven to be effective, and others not. Yet, one thing is expected from all
these offerings. Educators expect the professional development programs they
participate in to make a difference in their teaching and improve student learning, but
in reality, professional development, as a whole, has not been as effective as
expected (Hill, 2009). There have been improvements in professional development,
but the results are pessimistic at best (Guskey, 2000).
It is also the perception of professional development, which contributes to its
ineffectiveness. Many feel that it is too top down, often coming from the latest
workshops or meetings administrators have been to and not because of teacher needs
(Easton, 2008). Top-down professional development runs contrary to the
researchers’ belief that professional development needs should be determined by
teachers, not by administrators (Sawchuck & Keller, 2010; Easton, 2008). Another

6
perception that leads people to feel professional development is ineffective is that
typical professional development is not relevant to current school and classroom
situations, which in turn, makes for little impact on changing teaching (Guskey,
2000).
Three additional, common problems with current professional development
programs are expense, lack of follow-up, and irrelevance. Many professional
development programs available to educators are expensive. School districts across
the country spend billions of dollars on in-service seminars and professional
development programs that can be intellectually superficial, fragmented, and do not
use adult learning theory to anchor their activities and skill sets (Borko, 2004). In
fact, public schools are spending about $20 billion annually on professional
development activities (Hill, 2009; Guskey & Yoon, 2009). With the vast amount of
money it costs to hold professional development at schools, one would think most of
the school districts’ budgets are geared towards these programs; however, less than
1% of a typical school district’s budget is allocated for professional development
(Sparks & Hirsh, 2000). This reporting does not seem to make sense. There is a gap
and misalignment between the amount of money being reportedly spent on
professional development programs and the individual line items in school districts’
budgets actually being appropriated.
In addition to being expensive, many professional development programs are
designed as one-time workshops. These workshops do not have any follow-up
training or support built in to the programs because the trainers or facilitators are

7
hired for one day and expect the implementation to happen on its own (Hill, 2009).
Hill (2008) reported that in one particular instance, teachers at a school were given a
math professional development workshop, and were not able to transfer their skills
from the training to the classroom because there was no support from the trainers or
anyone else after the workshop. The new skills were either distorted or not present
at all (Hill, 2008). This lack of follow-up can result in a failure to transfer skills
from the training or workshop to the classroom as shown by the Hill (2008) study
(Kerka, 2003; Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001; Quick, Hotzman, &
Chaney, 2009; Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2001).
Finally, as Borko (2004) states that some professional development can be
intellectually superficial, there appears to be a lack of connection to practice in many
of these programs thus rendering the time spent on professional development as
inefficient and a waste. There are superficial professional development programs in
existence that lack relevance to what teachers are actually doing in the classrooms.
Consequently, Borko (2004) looked at three phases of professional development,
each phase building upon the previous one with the end goal of wanting to progress
towards providing high quality professional development for all teachers. In phase
one, Borko (2004) explored three aspects within professional development programs
offered: knowledge of subject matter, student thinking, and instructional practices.
In each of the professional development programs that were examined, the
connection to teacher practice was evident (Borko, 2004), therefore, providing
evidence of the importance of linking new knowledge and skills to the everyday

8
classroom. This is just one aspect of identifying effective professional development
opportunities.
This is not to say that all professional development programs are a waste of
time, as evidenced by Borko’s (2004) exploration into some professional
development programs that were effective. In fact, there is evidence to show that
effective professional development can produce student achievement results
(Guskey, 2000; Borko, 2004). The constant among the literature is that, “notable
improvements in education almost never take place in the absence of professional
development” (Guskey, 2000, p. 4). In the Yoon et al. (2007) study mentioned
above, although only nine studies met evidence standards, Yoon et al. (2007)
concluded that teachers who received a large amount of professional development
could boost student achievement by 21 percentage points. Professional development
is a key ingredient in school reform efforts that if supported, designed well, and
thoughtfully brought to the attention of all stakeholders, can help student
achievement.
The ability to identify effective professional development can be difficult.
Guskey (2000) points out that one of the reasons for this problem is that evidence for
quality professional development is not widely available because educators have not
been responsible in documenting the positive effects of the programs that have been
the most effective. There is a need for comprehensive evaluation of the professional
development programs to take place so money can be spent on those programs that
have empirically validated results.

9
Reasons to Evaluate Professional Development
Guskey (2000) points out four reasons to evaluate professional development
programs. Contrary to the past view of professional development as a one-shot event
or something done to educators for the first few days of the new school year,
professional development is now viewed as dynamic, always changing, and
continuous. More and more, people are realizing that professional development
should have job-embedded learning experiences that take place over time (Sparks &
Hirsh, 2000). Giving educators time to discuss, think about, try out, and fine-tune
new practices within a supportive environment, calls for a focus on the evaluation of
professional development so educators do not feel as though they are wasting their
time or efforts (Guskey, 2000). Professional development opportunities are even
more important because educators are allocating more time towards the
implementation of new practices to meet student achievement demands. The
evaluation component of professional development becomes necessary to validate
efforts.
Second, professional development is necessary for change to occur. Not
change for the sake of change, but an intentional, systematic process to bring about
improvement (Guskey, 2000). It is critical to gather, analyze and present meaningful
data when trying to make changes or improvements. Again, having a concrete
measure to validate the efforts of teachers can aid in the implementation of
improvements and changes at the school.

10
Third, evaluation is important to drive better decision-making. Reliable,
validated information can guide reforms and programs (Guskey, 2000). Schools
need accurate and detailed information to make better decisions about where their
money is going, time being spent, unanticipated effects, costs, and effects.
Evaluation can serve this purpose.
Finally, evaluation helps to bring accountability at all levels of education.
There are many factors of responsibility involved with professional development.
The main objective is to have students’ achievement increase as a result (Guskey,
2000; Borko, 2004; Graczewski, Knudson, & Hotzman, 2009). As a result, each
stakeholder plays a role in the successful or unsuccessful implementation of
professional development at schools. From participants to the organization, each
person with a responsibility to the school is held accountable. This dissertation will
specifically look at the coaches’ role and relationship to implementing effective
professional development at their respective schools.
Difficulty in Identifying Effective Professional Development
The ability to identify good, effective professional development from the
grocery list of programs available is difficult for several reasons. First, there is
confusion about what can be deemed “effective” professional development (Guskey,
2000). Evaluators and researchers have not been able to agree upon a set of criteria
by which effective professional development can be measured. There are studies
done that look only at participants’ reactions to the experience of professional
development, leaving out whether or not skill transfer has taken place. Other studies

11
look at the participants’ commitment to changing their attitude or commitment to the
new innovation being introduced. Others look at student learning as the only criteria
when trying to determine if the professional development program has worked. The
evaluations that are currently done look at only one aspect of evaluation and do not
evaluate the full picture of the professional development program (Guskey, 2000).
Another reason it is difficult to pinpoint the elements of effective professional
development is because of the concentration on main effects (Guskey, 2000).
Researchers commonly conduct meta-analyses (Hedges & Olkin, 1985) using what
appear to be similar variables and outcomes. These results are then averaged and
“standardized” to give a measure of the effectiveness of professional development in
general (Guskey, 2000). While valuable, this approach disregards other pertinent
information that can contribute to the advancement of professional development
efforts. These variables, which include conditions, content, format of professional
development, and contextual characteristics also contribute to effective professional
development. Simply measuring the general effects of professional development
discounts these contributions.
Finally, Guskey (2000) points out that quantity of data is stressed over quality
when trying to evaluate components of effective professional development. The
main reason is that it is easier to count the occurrence or non-occurrence of specific
elements, rather than measure quality, which is difficult, time consuming, and can
also be intangible. It would take trained and knowledgeable observers to be able to
gather quality-type data. The levels of quality are much more tedious to measure,

12
which only a trained and knowledgeable person can see, and therefore, quality
indicators are largely ignored (Guskey, 2000). Guskey suggests that rather than
choosing one or the other, qualitative and quantitative measures should work hand in
hand so appropriate data can be gathered and analyzed to determine effective
professional development components.
The growing research into professional development shows that quality
professional development can help alter teacher behavior and yield gains in student
learning and achievement (Sparks & Hirsh, 2000). Comprehensive evaluation of
professional development is complex and has not been utilized or in some cases,
done properly, nor have the results from the evaluations been used in the most
effective way (Guskey, 2000). Due to the amount of money being spent on
professional development within each school, district, and state, evaluation is a way
to examine if schools’ money is being spent on the most effective professional
development and if the professional development is being implemented to improve
student learning, the ultimate goal (Guskey, 2000; Kerka, 2003). Sparks and Hirsh
(2000) conclude that, “[t]he potential of professional development to improve
student achievement is so great that we cannot afford continued complacency toward
the status quo” (p. 42). Therefore, effective evaluation of professional development
elements and programs will help to steer educators towards the right direction.
Framework for Evaluation
Kirkpatrick (1994, 2001, 2006) offers a widely known methodology for
evaluating training programs, professional development, and classes (Guskey, 2000).

13
Kirkpatrick (1994) identifies four levels of evaluation that may be used to evaluate
programs: reactions, learning, transfer, and results. These four levels are related and
build upon each other to offer more comprehensive results the further up the ladder
the evaluation takes place. Reactions are the most common form of evaluation and
serve as the base for Kirkpatrick’s model. Learning or behavior is one step up from
reactions in the evaluative process followed by transfer and results.
The first level of evaluation measures the reaction of the participants to the
training. Most of the time, this is measured with attitude questionnaires given out at
the end of the training. At this level, all that is measured is the participants’
perception of the training they just received. For example, math teachers participate
in a professional development training on how to teach a new math strategy for
algebra. This first level of evaluation would simply ask the participants if they liked
the training.
This level of evaluation can be deemed as “surface” evaluation. One critique
of this type of evaluation is that it does not take into account any of the skills learned
or what participants will take back to their working environment so it can often be
dismissed as superficial. Another critique of this level of evaluation is that learning
theorists caution against staying at this level of evaluation as the sole measure of the
effectiveness of a professional development program. Even if a program or learning
opportunity is enjoyable, it may not be the type of activity that will result in an
improved job performance (Clark & Estes, 2008).

14
However, despite the short-falls of this first level of evaluation, it can serve a
critical purpose in the entire evaluation process. First, the level of participants’
motivation and attention is important to the success of professional development and
implementation. Motivational theory supports this assertion that students learn better
if the material being studied is interesting to them (Stipek, 1993). If educators are
excited to learn the material being taught in the professional development training,
they are more likely to pay attention and want to try the new skills and strategies.
The second level of evaluation Kirkpatrick describes is learning. This level
of evaluation encompasses the extent to which participants change their attitude,
improve knowledge, and increase their skill as a result of the training (Kirkpatrick,
2004). Both pre- and post-testing are necessary to determine whether participants
actually increased their knowledge base. Kirkpatrick (2004) concludes that,
“[m]easuring the learning that takes place in a training program is important in order
to validate the learning objectives” (p. 3). In the math professional development
training example above, at a level two evaluation, participants would be asked if they
know more now, after the training, about how to teach the new math strategy for
algebra.
The next level of evaluation identified by Kirkpatrick as performance or
behavior is not often evaluated because it can be complex and time consuming. This
level of evaluation determines the amount of transfer of learning that has taken place
from the training to the workplace environment. This level of evaluation measures
whether or not teachers are able to transfer the skills learned from the professional

15
development workshop into classroom practice. There are two ways to evaluate
performance; either formally through testing or informally through observation. This
type of evaluation very rarely takes place because it is tedious, takes a lot of effort,
and needs the passage of time to occur. However, this level of evaluation is critical
to measure because the primary purpose of professional development is to improve
results by having educators learn new skills and apply the new knowledge to their
classrooms. The results from this level of evaluation are key in determining the
transfer of learning and any barriers encountered when trying to implement in the
work environment (Kirkpatrick, 2004). Again, in the math professional development
example, at level three, participants would be asked, after some time has passed from
the training, if they are using what they learned from the training and applying it to
their classrooms.
At the fourth level, the professional development program’s overall
effectiveness and impact is evaluated. The change in results informs stakeholders of
the return of investment the organization has received as a result from the training.
This fourth level is often even more difficult and complex to measure than transfer
and therefore even more rarely used. However, the results from this type of
evaluation can provide the most constructive information an organization would
need to make better, more informed decisions. Referring back to the math
professional development example, at this fourth level of evaluation, students’ math
scores would be used to determine an overall effectiveness. If the students’ math

16
scores are improving, then that would show a positive impact of the professional
development training.
Overall, Kirkpatrick’s (2004) model demonstrates the various levels of
evaluation for professional development programs. More specifically, it provides the
constructive framework for this dissertation. The questions that will be researched
for this dissertation specifically address level three evaluations of transfer. More
specifically, this study looks at the use of coaching, which researchers Joyce and
Showers (1980) conclude, coaching is a strategy often used to aid in the transfer of
new skills and knowledge.
Coaching
Joyce and Showers (1980) examined the research on teachers’ abilities to
learn teaching skills and strategies. Their findings were that given adequate training
conditions, teachers were able to consistently fine-tune existing skills and learn new
ones. One of the strategies to assist the transfer of acquired or mastered skills to
classroom practice is coaching.
The term coaching has come to mean many different things for people. In
this paper, coaching is defined as:
...an observation and feedback cycle in an on-going instructional or clinical
situation…usually involves a collegial approach to the analysis of teaching
for the purpose of integrating mastered skills and strategies into: a)
curriculum, b) set of instructional goals, c) a time span, and d) a personal
teaching style. (Joyce and Showers, 1981, p. 170)

Coaching is more than just a role. It is strategic and systematic in approaching
student learning (Saphier & West, 2009). Coaching can be used as a training device

17
to help ensure the vertical transfer of acquired skills. The coach can help the learner
determine when to use the skills and how to modulate them to their students;
basically offering support and guidance (Joyce & Showers, 1981). The transfer of
skills acquired into the teacher’s active repertoire appears to involve new learning,
which requires the addition of a further important step in the training sequence: on-
site coaching (Joyce & Showers, 1981).
Statement of the Problem
The area of professional development in the education system is flawed.
From the expense to the evaluations of programs to the actual implementation of the
new knowledge and skills, professional development efforts can no longer be
neglected. It is not efficient for schools and teachers to invest the time and money
into questionable professional development opportunities. The mandates of the
NCLB and Race to the Top initiatives require teachers to show increased student
outcomes often as a result of partaking in professional development activities.
According to the research, one of the key pieces that appears to be missing
from determining quality professional development is evaluation. Thorough
evaluations of professional development programs can provide a better guide for
school reform efforts. Currently, school leaders have little guidance in determining
effective and meaningful professional development programs for their faculty. More
study into professional development and its effectiveness can provide the necessary
guidelines for selecting effective activities from the plethora of programs available.

18
More specifically, there is a missing piece in the area of implementation of
new knowledge and skills acquired from the professional development trainings.
Many professional development programs do not follow-up what was taught to
ensure correct application to the classroom. As a result of no follow-up, educators
come to view the professional development training they have received as ineffective
and irrelevant to what they are doing in the classroom.
The Kirkpatrick (2004) framework provides a means for combating this
issue. Most professional development program evaluations touch upon only
“satisfaction,” which is not a measure of true learning, application, and effectiveness.
Kirkpatrick’s (2004) framework, while not perfect, offers a path to more intricate
and comprehensive evaluation means.
Purpose of the Study
Support for teachers to successfully transfer skills from the professional
development training to classrooms is a key factor in ensuring implementation. The
purpose of this study is to look at the behavior of instructional coaches at various
schools where the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training
is taking place. The perception of teachers at each school will be gathered to
determine whether coaching is taking place and the degree to which they think it
increases their ability to be able to implement the new skills and knowledge learned.
Ultimately, the goal for this study is to support the schools at which this professional
development program is taking place and help them strengthen the use of follow-up
with respect to implementation of new knowledge and skills.

19
There is considerable value for this study to occur. Although there have been
other studies done regarding coaching and follow-up, this study will look at a
particular training that is being implemented within the Hawaii Department of
Education. There is value in being able to help specific schools improve and not just
conduct studies when the results can be generalized. The study will focus on specific
schools and will bring much needed feedback so the schools are able to better serve
their teachers and students.
Research Questions
There are five questions this dissertation will attempt to answer.
1. To what degree do participating teachers believe the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training aligns with their school,
personal, and state goals and does this belief change over time? This
question attempts to evaluate at Kirkpatrick’s level 1, reaction.
2. What is the relationship between participating in the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners professional development training
and teacher efficacy? This question attempts to evaluate at Kirkpatrick’s
level 1, reaction.
3. Do teachers who participate in the Building Foundation Reading Skills
for Diverse Learners training have more knowledge and skills after
participating in the training? If so, were the teachers able to retain what
they have learned? This question attempts to evaluate at Kirkpatrick’s
level 2, learning.

20
4. What is the relationship between the supports participants feel they need
to implement what they have learned from the professional development
training to their respective campuses and what is actually taking place?
This question attempts to evaluate at Kirkpatrick’s Level 3, transfer.
5. What is the relationship between teachers’ perceptions of the
effectiveness of their coach and their ability to transfer the skills gained
from the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners to the
classroom? This question attempts to evaluate at Kirkpatrick’s level 3,
transfer.
Definition of Terms
These are some terms with their definitions that will be used throughout this
dissertation.
Andragogy — “An individual-transactional model of adult learning designed
to transcend specific applications and situations” (Knowles, 1978).
Pedagogy — “The art and science of leading children” (Knowles, 1978).
Coaching — “An observation and feedback cycle in an on-going
instructional or clinical situation…usually involves a collegial approach to the
analysis of teaching for the purpose of integrating mastered skills and strategies into:
a) curriculum, b) set of instructional goals, c) a time span, and d) a personal teaching
style” (Joyce and Showers, 1981, p.170).

21
Self-efficacy — “An individual’s feelings about their abilities to produce
selected amounts of performance that have an effect on events that influence their
lives” (Bandura, 1994).
Personal teaching efficacy — “A belief in one’s capability to teach
effectively” (Plourde, 2002).
Organization of the Study
This study is organized into five chapters. The first chapter provides an
introduction and background of the problem: we do not know how helpful teachers
find the work of instructional coaches to their ability to apply skills from the
professional development training to the everyday classroom. Identifying the
coaching strategies that teachers found to be helpful could improve coaches’ ability
to support professional development in the future.
Chapter Two provides a literature review of previous research. It will
examine how the adult learning theory, Andragogy, can be used to construct quality
professional development training. Core features of professional development that
have been identified in the literature and informed by the Andragogy theory will be
discussed. The chapter will also examine the current literature surrounding
significant outcomes of professional development, factors found to influence teacher
self-efficacy, and coaching.
Chapter Three discusses the mixed methods approach used to collect and
analyze data. Chapter Three presents the methodology used in the study, including
the research design, population and sampling procedure, and the instruments and

22
their selection or development, together with information on validity and reliability.
The chapter will provide rationale, including strengths and limitations of the current
study. The chapter will also describe the procedures for data collection and the plan
for analysis.
Chapter Four details the findings of the study.
Chapter Five discusses and analyzes the results, culminating in conclusions
and possible next steps.

23
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature on professional development is vast. Many researchers have
written about professional development and tried to contribute their knowledge and
findings to further along the field. One example is Hilda Borko. Borko (2004)
studied various phases of professional development. In her study, Borko (2004)
found three areas teachers need to be proficient at in order to get the most out of their
students. First, in order to encourage students’ conceptual understanding, teachers
must have rich and flexible knowledge of the subject they teach. The central facts
and concepts of the subject matter must be known, the ability to make connections
between ideas, and the processes used to establish new knowledge and determine
valid material is essential for teachers to understand (Borko, 2004). Second, for
teachers to be able to guide student thinking, they must understand how children’s
ideas about a particular subject develop. The connection between children’s ideas
and the important ideas in the subject are important aspects to take into consideration
(Borko, 2004). Third, the idea of practice is also helpful to learning how to
incorporate new knowledge and skills (Borko, 2004). Borko (2004) goes on to
conclude that this idea is parallel to the way adults learn. “Research using the
individual teacher as the unit of analysis also indicates that meaningful learning is a
slow and uncertain process for teachers, just as it is for students” (Borko, 2004,
p.11). Knowles (1978) argues that the same is true for adult learners, and therefore

24
the same advice applies to the most common adult learning context: professional
development.
Quality professional development programs encompass various components.
These components, which are gathered from data based research on what constitutes
effective professional development are complex. Kirkpatrick (2004) offers an
overarching framework for the evaluation of professional development, but the
question remains as to what quality professional development actually entails.
The components of what constitutes quality professional development
trainings are only the first step in trying to effect change in the classroom and/or at a
school. Teachers can attend a high quality professional development opportunity
and not use or apply any of the new knowledge and skills thus making the time and
effort spent in the professional development training null and void. One of the
problems with the transfer of professional development from the training sites to the
everyday classroom is efficacy. Shidler (2009), states that sustaining change in
efficacy beliefs of teachers is one of the biggest challenges of professional
development opportunities. A way to overcome this challenge is to ensure
professional development is anchored in adult learning theory (Shidler, 2009; Joyce
& Showers, 1981). Ultimately, professional development is a reflection of adult
learning in practice. There are many different theories on the subject of adult
learning. The major theorist that will be discussed is Knowles and his theory on
andragogy as it provides a strong foundation for professional development and aligns
well with Kirkpatrick’s levels of evaluation. Another way to increase efficacy is

25
through coaching. Coaching can play a supportive and integral role in building a
teacher’s self-efficacy as well as the training received from effective professional
learning opportunities.
Finally, this chapter will explore what is already known, in the research,
about what constitutes effective professional development. In the process of
reviewing what the research suggests is most likely to strengthen teachers’ efficacy,
and in particular what effective coaching consists of, this chapter will call out the
important variables for this particular study.
Levels of Evaluation
As mentioned in Chapter One, Kirkpatrick offers an evaluation model for
training programs and workshops that can help determine whether a professional
development program is effective. The four levels, which build upon each other in
complexity and evaluation, include reaction, learning, behavior or performance and
results. The Kirkpatrick evaluation model is the overarching framework that will be
utilized for the purpose of this dissertation’s research questions. Throughout this
chapter, the elements of effective professional development and the research behind
effective professional development will be discussed.
Adult Learning Theory
The concept of andragogy has evolved over time and across many cultures.
There has been interest in adult learning from the early Greeks to the Chinese, each
coming up with various techniques and philosophizing about the best way adults can
learn (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). Many cognitive and behavioral

26
researchers have contributed to the theory of andragogy; Rogers, Maslow, Erikson
and Havinghurst have all laid a foundation for andragogy. However, the difference
is that these researchers were more concerned with the responses of children and
animals rather than adults. Knowles (2010) asserts that, based on the lack of
research into the process of adult learning, despite the early interest in the topic,
those instructing adults assumed that there was no difference between that type of
instruction and the instruction of children. This assumption went on through well
into the twentieth century (Knowles, 2010). Most educators are primarily concerned
with the idea of pedagogy, not realizing that as adults, a different learning process
might be more beneficial. Pedagogy “literally means the art and science of leading
children” (Knowles, 2010). Since the mid 20
th
century various theorists have
explored the idea of adult learning and developed ideas on the most effective process
adults learn. The process of how adults learn is key in professional development
because professional development itself is about teaching adults new knowledge,
skill sets, or strategies. As the analysis will show, Knowles’ theory on andragogy is
the most applicable theory for the purpose of this dissertation.
Knowles
Knowles cites Tough’s 1971 work with adult learners as instrumental in
teaching how adults learn naturally and how they organize their learning activities
and seek out support. Tough focused on the learning that happened when adults
learned naturally versus when they were intentionally taught (Knowles, 1978).
Further, Thorndike’s work with adult learners provided even more support to

27
Knowles’ work because this research led to more of a focus on how adult learning
differed from the way children learned (Merriam, 2001).
By 1940s most of the elements for a comprehensive theory of adult learning
had been discovered but they had not yet been brought together into a unified
theory-they remained isolated insights, concepts, and principles. It was
during the 1940-50s that these ideas were brought together with the
knowledge of the various disciplines of the human science. (Knowles, 1978,
p. 16)

According to Knowles, andragogy is defined as, “the artistic stream of inquiry, that
which seeks to discover new knowledge through intuition and the analysis of
experience that was concerned with how adults learn” (Knowles, 1978, p. 10).
Knowles, Holton and Swanson (2005) further describe andragogy as:
A set of core adult learning principles that apply to all adult learning
situations. The goals and purposes for which the learning is offered are a
separate issue. Adult education professionals should develop and debate
models of adult learning separately from models of goals and purposes of
their respective fields that use adult learning. (pp. 2-3)

At the center of andragogy are the core adult learning principles, surrounded by the
individual and situational differences encompassed by the goals and purposes of
learning. These are the three dimensions of andragogy, which encompass the
categories found in other major typologies of adult learning. Andragogy focuses on
the actual learning transaction and is equally applicable to each learning scenario
because of its focus on learning transaction rather than the overall goal for which the
program is offered. Another benefit is that andragogy is an individual learning
framework, but individual learning may occur for the purpose of advancing the
individual, institutional, or societal growth.

28
Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (2005) refer to the outermost dimension or
ring of the andragogy model as the goals and purposes for learning, also referred to
as the outcomes. The outcomes are referred to as developmental outcomes, not the
program goal itself. There are three major pockets of growth that can occur:
individual, institutional, and societal. The traditional view of adult learning is the
individual’s own growth. Institutional growth refers to how the institution is
improved as a result of the learning opportunity. Different goals require adjustments
to how andragogical assumptions are applied. Societal growth, under this
dimension, refers to the goals and purposes within the learning context are oriented
to societal as well as individual improvement.
The second dimension or ring inside of the outcomes dimension is the
individual and situation differences (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005).
Individual and situation differences are portrayed as variables. There are subject-
matter differences where different subject matter may require different learning
strategies. There are situational differences to be aware of also. These differences
can be micro or macro level and can happen prior to and during learning. With
respect to individual learner differences, it is important to keep in mind our
understanding of individual differences. This understanding can help to shape the
andragogical approach to fit the uniqueness of each learner. Another important
aspect to keep in mind is the individuals’ cognitive, personality, and prior knowledge
of the subject. Each of these aspects will help to tailor the training. The life-span
role development theory’s main contribution is to help explain when adults are most

29
ready for and most need learning and also when they may be the most motivated to
learn as well.
There are six assumptions that serve as the base and core of the andragogical
model (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). The first assumption is that adults
want to know why they need to learn something and that the learning is relevant to
them. Second, is the learner’s self-concept. As people mature, they become less
dependent and more self-directed so they develop a need to be recognized, and
treated, by others as a self-directed human being (Merriam, Caffarella, &
Baumgartner, 2007). The third assumption is the role of the learners’ experiences.
Adults enter into education with vast experience behind them that can have
consequences on their education (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1998). Fourth is
adults’ readiness to learn. In order for the adult to learn, the learning experience
must align with his/her developmental tasks thus far in their lives (Knowles, Holton,
& Swanson, 1998). Fifth is orientation to learning. Adults are motivated to learn
new material if that material is applicable to their real-life situations. Adults are life-
centered and need to see purpose (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1998). Finally, the
sixth assumption is motivation. Adults’ primary motivators to learn come from their
own internal desires rather than from external rewards (Knowles, 1984).
These six assumptions lead to four major underlying principles (Knowles,
1984) of andragogy. The first principle is that adults need to be involved in the
planning and evaluation of their instruction and learning. Second, experience,
including mistakes provides the basis for adult learning activities. Third, adults are

30
most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance to their job or
personal life. The fourth principle is that adult learning is problem-centered rather
than content-oriented. These principles lay the foundation for constructing effective
professional development for adults. Moreover, applying the six assumptions as well
as the four principles leads to concrete examples of applying andragogy. Knowles
(1984) identifies some of the key points to keep at the forefront of the construction of
effective professional development are explaining why specific things are being
taught, keeping instruction task-oriented by including learning activities in the
context of common tasks to be performed, taking into account the wide range of
different background of learners, and allowing learners to discover things for
themselves and providing guidance and help when mistakes are made.
Critiques of Andragogy
Not everyone can agree that andragogy is the “organizing principle in adult
education” (Davenport & Davenport, 1985). Jarvis and others, as noted by
Brookfield (1986), argue that andragogy lacks empirical support to support the
theory as the educational principle. One of the main criticisms of andragogy as a
comprehensive adult learning theory is that both children and adults can display self-
directed learning, but many adults do not display self-directedness. Brookfield
(1986) points out that his main concern is that many adults in various cultures lack
self-directedness, which can be due to the fact that self-directedness may be a result
of maturity and culture as opposed to a characteristic adults already have.

31
Another critique by theorists is that andragogical principles can best be
considered as part of the bigger subject of pedagogy (Merriam, 2001). A comparison
between andragogy and Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, by Milligan (1995)
cites the similarities between the two theories; the idea of a horizontal relationship
between teacher and student and problem-centered learning. Milligan (1995) further
suggests that the two theories are related and thus, be placed under the larger
umbrella of pedagogy.
Other critiques of andragogy point out that the focus of andragogy is on the
individual and lack of social agenda. Others focus on outcomes such as perspective
transformation rather than the process of learning. The link between these criticisms
is the andragogical focus on the individual’s growth and change and the lack of
attention to how these changes relate to the bigger society. Knowles was well aware
of these critiques and the tension that exists between those who believe the goal of
education is individual growth and those who believe that the goal of education is to
improve society (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005).
Support for Andragogy
Although there are many critiques to andragogy as a comprehensive theory, it
is, “the single most important contribution to a uniquely adult theory of teaching and
learning” (Brookfield, 1984, p. 189). Brookfield goes on to conclude that rather than
determining whether andragogy and pedagogy are separate theories of education, it
is useful to recognize that the principles and assumptions of andragogy and
pedagogy are appropriate. The principles and assumptions can be applied no matter

32
the age, time, and/or purpose. It is also important to point out that Knowles also
came to the same conclusion as his ideas developed over time.
Originally, Knowles developed andragogy as the opposite to pedagogy.
Where pedagogy emphasized the experience of the teacher in planning and
transmitting knowledge, andragogy placed importance on the experiences of the
learners (Ingalls & Arceri, 1972; Knowles et al., 2005). However, as Knowles
applied his andragogical assumption to practice, it became clear that some principles
could be applied towards children and equally, that sometimes andragogical
principles would not be appropriate when working with adults. Knowles then
adapted andragogy as a system of alternative sets of assumptions to pedagogy; an
individual-transactional model that speaks to the characteristics of the learner and the
learning situation.
Knowles was well aware of the critiques to the theory of andragogy and
acknowledged that they were correct in their observations that andragogy failed to
address learning outcomes such as social change. Through the evolution of
andragogy, Knowles came to view andragogy as a flexible set of alternative
assumptions about adult learning rather than a comprehensive theory of adult
education. Thus, Knowles wanted to develop a transactional model of adult learning
that could be applied across settings to meet varied learning goals. The main focus
of andragogy remains the process of learning, not the outcome.

33
Application of Andragogy
Knowles’ theory of andragogy is inclusive and the implications of the use of
andragogical knowledge are numerous. Knowles (1978) notes:
There is a growing evidence too, that the use of andragogical theory is
making a difference in the way programs of adult education are being
organized and operates, in the way adults are being helped to learn, there is
even evidence that the concept of andragogy are beginning to make an impact
on the theory and practice of elementary, secondary and collegiate education.
(p. 20)

The value of an adult learning theory is the impact it has on learning itself
and the strides adult learning programs are able to make if anchored in an adult
learning theory.
Knowles’ theory of andragogy appears to be a comprehensive “fit” for
professional development and flexible enough, unlike the other adult learning
theories previously discussed. Knowles (1984b) intended for andragogy to be
applicable to all adult learning environments and noted two particularly fluid
portions of his theory:
1. The andragogical model is a system of elements that can be adopted or
adapted in whole or in part. It is not an ideology that must be applied
totally and without modification. In fact, an essential feature of
andragogy is flexibility.
2. The appropriate starting point and strategies for applying the andragogical
model depend on the situation. (p. 418)

34
The usual norm of professional development programs has been to mirror
pedagogical format because there was never a set process of adult learning
(Knowles, 2010). Under Knowles’ theory, there is an enhanced conceptual
framework to more systematically apply andragogy across multiple domains of adult
learning practice. The three rings of the model interact allowing the model to offer a
three-dimensional process for understanding adult learning situations; a model that
recognizes the lack of homogeneity among learners and learning situations, and
illustrates that the learning transaction is a multifaceted activity.
There are two ways to utilize Knowles’ andragogy model; from the outside-in
application and the inside-out application. If looking at the outside-in model, it is
critical to first assess the extent to which the andragogical assumptions fit the
learners at that point in time. It is also necessary to determine the extent to which
each of the six groups of factors would impact on each of the six core assumptions.
That impact might be to make it more important, less important, or not that it is not
present in the participant group. Finally, deviations and potential changes should be
noted to be cautious of any potential problems. The inside-out application of the
Knowles’ andragogy model can be applied when not much is known about the
participants in advance. It is critical to start with the core principles as a guide for
structuring the learning opportunity and as other elements become factors, Knowles’
andragogy model is able to adapt and make adjustments as needed.
The core principles of andragogy provide a sound foundation for planning
adult learning experiences (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). Analysis should

35
be done prior to the learning opportunity to understand the particular adult learners
and their individual characteristics, the characteristics of the subject matter, and the
characteristics of the particular situation in which adult learning is being utilized
(Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). Adjustments to the core principles can then
be anticipated. The goals and purposes for which the adult learning is conducted
provide the frame that shapes the learning experience. The goals and purposes
should be clearly identified and the possible effects on adult learning explained
(Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005).
Knowles’ andragogy theory provides another layer under the Kirkpatrick
framework in determining effective professional development. As the Kirkpatrick
framework provides a way to evaluate training and workshops, andragogy is one of
the main components of what constitutes effective professional development. The
four principles of applying Knowles’ andragogy theory can be linked directly to the
Kirkpatrick framework. More specifically, the fourth principle of allowing learners
to discover things for themselves while also providing guidance and help is linked to
Kirkpatrick’s third level of evaluation, behavior or performance. According to
Kirkpatrick, this level involves the learner’s ability to perform the new skills while
on the job and produce the needed results in their working environment. It is
important to measure performance because the main purpose of training is to
improve results by having the learners acquire new skills and knowledge and then
actually apply them to their workplace (Kirkpatrick, 1994). In Knowles’ theory,
transfer of knowledge or skill is a main principle of andragogy, but he also makes a

36
case for support of the learner as well. At the school level, academic coaching
and/or instructional support staff provide these support services to their teachers.
The idea of coaching will be discussed in the next section.
Coaching
Joyce and Showers (1980) examined the research on teachers’ abilities to
learn teaching skills and strategies. Their findings were that given adequate training
conditions, teachers were able to consistently fine-tune existing skills and learn new
ones. One of the strategies to assist the transfer of acquired or mastered skills to
classroom practice is coaching.
The term coaching has come to mean many different things for people. In
this paper, coaching is defined as:
...an observation and feedback cycle in an on-going instructional or clinical
situation…usually involves a collegial approach to the analysis of teaching
for the purpose of integrating mastered skills and strategies into: a)
curriculum, b) set of instructional goals, c) a time span, and d) a personal
teaching style. (Joyce & Showers, 1981, p. 170)

Coaching is more than just a role. It is strategic and systematic in approaching
student learning (Saphier & West, 2010). Coaching can be used as a training device
to help ensure the vertical transfer of acquired skills. The coach can help the learner
determine when to use the skills and how to modulate them to their students;
basically offering support and guidance (Joyce & Showers, 1981). The transfer of
skills acquired into the teacher’s active repertoire appears to involve new learning,
which requires the addition of a further important step in the training sequence: on-
site coaching (Joyce & Showers, 1981).

37
The previous research and statistics on coaching is inconclusive (Reeves,
2007). There haven’t been that many peer reviewed studies conducted on the
effectiveness of coaching since 1937. Of the 131 peer-reviewed studies found by
Sherman and Freas (2004), only 56 were empirical and few met reliability standards.
A main culprit of the inconclusive results is that the definition of coaching needs to
be more defined and precise (Reeves, 2007).
Coaching is a positive follow-up to professional development. “As the
research on student achievement has increasingly drawn a positive link with the
quality of teacher instruction, coaching has emerged as a preferred model of effective
professional learning, underpinned by a strong evidence base” (Gill, Kostiw, &
Stone, 2010). Gill, Kostiw, and Stone (2010) examined a school district in Canada
that has embraced coaching as a key strategy for school improvement. The district
employed about 260 full time coaches for literacy, numeracy, or science and
experienced gains in student outcomes (Gill, Kostiw, & Stone 2010). Shidler (2009)
also concluded that coaching led to higher student achievement in classrooms where
teachers had the help of academic coaches.
Coaching is different from training for skill acquisition. Practice is at the
core of coaching because if remained unused, skills will tend to atrophy (Wong &
Wong, 2008; Joyce & Showers, 1981). Another key component to coaching is
feedback. Feedback stresses the appropriateness of specific strategies to certain
goals (Joyce & Showers, 1981). It is a collaborative effort where teacher and coach
examine the appropriate places in the curriculum for the use of specific strategies,

38
evaluate the effectiveness of observed lessons, and plan for future trials. This phase
of professional development represents a continuing problem-solving approach
between the teacher and coach. The term feedback is not to be taken lightly. A
coach who simply tells a teacher “good job” without noting what was done well is
not effective. It is more effective for the coach to ask questions to the learner which
make them think about what they did well. This process aids the learner in self-
reflection and being able to generate their own feedback (Joyce & Showers, 1988).
Again, this emphasizes the vertical transfer of skills from the training to the
classroom. One of the major problems in teacher training designs, cited by Joyce
and Showers (1981), is the assumption that a skill, once learned, will be magically in
place in the classroom. Joyce and Showers (1981) conclude that learning has to take
place in the process of transfer, which coaching helps to do.
The process of coaching is also anchored in adult learning theory. Joyce and
Showers (1981) concur and state, “an understanding of a theory behind the teaching
approach contributes to the development of skill and ultimately to its use” (p. 164).
Gill, Kostiw, and Stone (2010) also agree with Joyce and Showers’ findings in their
study of coaching where they found that adult learning principles and broader
principles of human learning are consistent with coaching. Coaching helps to embed
and sustain change because with more practice and support, transfer of skills and
knowledge will likely take place. Also consistent with adult learning theories is that
adults should be allowed to move through the learning process at their own pace; and
also allowed time for repeated and guided practice of new skills (Shidler, 2009).

39
These all encompass the idea behind coaching. Coaching gives the support,
encouragement, and expertise for teachers to practice their new skills. As mentioned
earlier, Knowles’ theory encourages practice with coaching to ensure transfer and
help with the implementation of newly acquired knowledge and skills (Knowles,
Holton, & Swanson, 2005).
Gill, Kostiw, and Stone (2010) in reviewing the literature on coaching,
identifies six elements which underpin effective coaching. These elements can be
viewed as interdependent and integrated because a coach may demonstrate all
aspects of these elements throughout the coaching experience. The six elements are:
professional relationships, data and evidence, substantive conversation, school
improvement, purposeful instruction, and self-development. These six elements will
be explained in more detail in the following paragraph.
The first element, professional relationships, refers to the coaches’ task of
developing a rapport with their teachers and leaders within the school setting.
Rapport constitutes more than just a working relationship, but a trust and respect
with all parties involved so there is a developing partnership and support for
everyone (Gill, Kostiw, & Stone, 2010). It is also critical to note that the coaches are
not only skilled in building relationships but also armed with contextual knowledge
and can hold people accountable.
The ability to collect data and evidence is a very critical element to coaching.
In order to see results from the training received, coaches need to have the capacity
to collect and use qualitative and quantitative data purposefully (Gill, Kostiw, &

40
Stone, 2010). Data collection occurs at the school level and with each individual
teacher. At the school level, data can be used to develop assessment schedules and
using a range of assessment tools. With individual teachers, data is used for
planning and making informed decisions.
One of the key cornerstones to a coach’s work is the ability to elicit
substantive conversations. This can be difficult to do because each conversation is
personalized to each individual teacher (Gill, Kostiw, & Stone, 2010). The role of
the coach is to guide the teacher to use data driven evidence to examine student
learning and problematic practices in the classroom.
The fourth element identified by Gill, Kostiw, and Stone (2010) is school
improvement. It emphasizes the work of the coach as not a solo endeavor, but as a
collaborative effort with the school leadership team and is also linked to the school
planning effort. This ensures the work of the coach will be able to be sustainable in
the long run.
Coaches are also skilled in purposeful instruction. School classrooms are
diverse and need to meet the needs of different student populations. This element
supports teachers in differentiating their instruction to meet those needs (Gill,
Kostiw, & Stone, 2010). Coaches support teachers in making the connection
between differentiation, discipline, and pedagogical content knowledge. Within this
element, observation, feedback, modeling, and planning occur.
Finally, the sixth element to effective coaching is self development. As
educators, coaches are also lifelong learners and it is critical for them to model this

41
for their teachers to ensure they stay on top of their field (Gill, Kostiw, & Stone,
2010). It is important for coaches, who are demanding accountability for teacher
learning to also be accountable to themselves by setting aspirational levels of
learning. Some of the key demonstrations of this element are being able to reflect on
their own practice and be able to strengthen their capacity as a professional.
Coaching used as a tool for successful implementation of professional
development can be a good resource for schools that are trying to improve (Joyce &
Showers, 1981). This specific study is interested in determining whether
instructional coaching is taking place and also whether coaching is aiding in the
vertical transfer of skills from the training to the workplace environment. However,
effective coaching and follow-up with teachers after receiving the training is not the
sole answer to successful implementation. Teacher self-efficacy can play an integral
part of a teacher’s ability to carry forward the new skills and knowledge. Albert
Bandura’s research on social cognitive theory helps to bring the term of self-efficacy
into perspective.
Self-efficacy
Social cognitive theory is based on Albert Bandura’s theory of reciprocal
determinism. It states that a person’s behavior influences and is influenced by
personal factors as well as the social environment. Bandura refers to this as a triadic,
dynamic, and reciprocal interaction (1986; Schunk, 1991). Usually, people are able
to influence their path in life through cognitive processes which can be characterized
by five unique human capabilities. The first is symbolizing. One’s experiences are

42
coded in symbols, (e.g., images, words, etc) that store information in their memory
for future use. The second is observational and vicarious learning. People can learn
by observing others and can model their behavior after those who are similar to
themselves or to whom they can relate. Third is forethought and self-reflection.
People can anticipate outcomes or have expectations about future events based on
their own past experiences. People are able to reflect, assess, and then act upon a
situation. The fourth capability is self-efficacy. One’s sense of self-confidence in
their own capabilities is constructed from their experiences and history, whether it is
good or bad. Generally, when people feel supported and affirmed, either by past
personal successes or by encouragement from others, their goals, expectations, and
drive to succeed can significantly increase. Finally, the fifth capability is self-
regulation. The more information people have, the richer their self-reflection can be
and the greater their potential is to successfully self-regulate in order to affect
behavior towards their ideal outcome. As a result, they will be able to exercise
personal control over thoughts, feelings, motivations, and actions (Bandura, 1986).
Of all five aspects of social cognitive theory, “none is more central or
pervasive than people’s beliefs about their capabilities to exercise control over their
own level of functioning and over events that affect their lives” (Bandura, 1991).
Self-efficacy beliefs function as an important and key determinant of human self-
regulation. One’s belief in their efficacy can influence the choices they make,
aspirations in life, the amount of effort they put into an action, how long they choose
to persevere when faced with obstacles and setbacks, whether their own thought

43
patters are hinder or aid them, the amount of stress they can experience when trying
to cope with demands, and their vulnerability to depression (Bandura, 1991).
Thus, people who think they have a high level of efficacy tend to take more
self-responsibility for their failures; blaming the failure on insufficient effort. Those
people who have low levels of efficacy or think of themselves as inefficacious, view
the cause of their failures as stemming from low ability, not effort. Motivation and
performance achievements are also based upon changes in self-efficacy beliefs
(Relich, Debus, & Walker, 1986; Schunk & Gunn, 1986).
Self-beliefs on efficacy can also affect goal-setting, part of the self-
regulation. The more capable people feel themselves to be, the higher goals they set
for themselves and the more committed are to their set goals (Bandura, 1991). A
person’s beliefs on whether or not they feel they can achieve the goals they set for
themselves are determined by whether negative discrepancies between personal
standards and attainments are motivating or discouraging. People who doubt their
capabilities are easily distracted by obstacles or failures and tend to not persist.
People who are confident in their abilities intensify their efforts when faced with
failure to achieve what they want and will persist until they do succeed (Bandura,
1991).
Self-efficacy also contributes to the value people place on activities. People
will tend to keep doing those activities they feel they are successful in and from
which they gain a lot of self-satisfaction by mastering challenges. Collins (1982)

44
concluded that a person’s intrinsic interest is better predicted by perceived self-
efficacy than by actual ability.
This idea of self-efficacy translates to teachers. A teacher’s personal self-
efficacy about their ability or capability to motivate their students and encourage
learning has an effect in the classroom they create and also on student achievement
(Haverback & Parault, 2008). Plourde (2002) defines personal teaching efficacy as a
belief in one’s ability to effectively teach. Also contributing to the research is
Gibson and Dembo (1984) who found that teacher efficacy could influence specific
classroom behaviors known to generate achievement gains. Therefore, as a result of
this research, teachers who have a high level of self-efficacy can help students
achieve more academically. Guskey (1988), also found that teachers who hold high
self-efficacy beliefs were more likely to embrace innovative techniques in the
classroom, especially those linked with mastery learning goals. More research has
found that high teacher efficacy also has been found to have a positive correlation
with positive teacher policies and practices that are used in the classroom (Wolters &
Daugherty, 2007). Allinder (1995) further discovered that teachers with high
personal and teacher efficacy demanded higher end-of-the-year goals for their
students as compared to those with lower efficacy. Along the lines of discipline and
participation in the school culture, Woolfolk and Hoy (1990) concluded that high
efficacy teachers were not as controlling of their students and welcomed being active
members of the school community.

45
More of the research (DeForest & Hughes, 1992; Meijer & Foster, 1988) has
shown that teachers with high self-efficacy were more likely to feel more in control
of situations, welcome consultation when dealing with students, and had lower
ratings for referrals of students. In contrast, Podell and Soodak (1993) concluded
that those teachers who had low personal teacher self-efficacy were more likely to
refer students.
Caprara, Borgogni, and Steca (2003) determined that in addition to positively
impacting teacher practices, teachers’ self-efficacy is one of the main determinants
of job satisfaction. Expanding on their study, Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2007) found a
negative correlation of high teacher self-efficacy to teacher burnout. Based upon the
high rates of attrition of teachers, these findings are critical to the teaching field.
Teachers who are content within their job are more likely to persist in their field.
One of the ways to promote teacher efficacy is through mastery experiences.
This statement is concurrent with Bandura’s (1994) theory, which states that mastery
experiences have the greatest impact in creating efficacy. Fritz, Kreutzer, and
MacPhee (1995) discovered that after an in-service, teachers who attended the
training session had higher self-efficacy than those in a control group despite the fact
that both groups had equal self-efficacy scores prior to the training. Similarly,
Sparks (1988) also looked at teachers who attended professional development
training. The results from that study concurred with Fritz et al. (1995). The results
showed that teachers who were “improving” had higher levels of self-efficacy and
those who were “non-improving” were less likely to use the new practices and, in

46
essence, failed to grow from the professional development. Another study conducted
by Ross and Bruce (2007) found that there was a positive impact on teachers’
efficacy in classroom management after a professional development experience as
compared to those teachers who did not attend the training. Thus, the literature
reviewed does show a positive result of high teacher efficacy on student
achievement, management, burnout, and the transfer of new knowledge or skills
acquired from professional development to the classroom. In this study, teacher self-
efficacy will be examined to determine if there is a relationship between efficacy and
implementation of newly acquired skills and knowledge received from the
professional development training.
Successful Reading Skills Training
The study being conducted for this dissertation focuses on a professional
development program for building reading skills. The premise behind the training is
to give teachers the knowledge and skills on how to teach reading to diverse learners.
The skills the teachers learn from this training can be utilized in all content areas.
However, it is important to understand what the literature says about successful
reading skills. By reviewing the literature, it can be understood what constitutes
successful professional development training on reading.
Despite increased interest in teaching children to read, increased funding, and
even more political attention, reading levels for many students remain inadequate
(National Center for Educational Statistics, 2000). One of the main reasons for the
low reading levels is instructional; teachers are not skilled in working with struggling

47
readers. Professional development is often identified as one of the key elements
needed to change the trajectory of progress for struggling readers and to ensure
success (Chard, 2004). Whitehurst (2002) found that teacher quality has a
significant effect on student achievement. By increasing teachers’ knowledge and
skill level can help to increase teacher quality thereby increasing student
achievement.
Studies have found that many teachers enter the classroom unprepared for
teaching (Chard, 2004). Elmore (2002) states, “Most people who currently work in
public schools weren’t hired to do this work, nor have they been adequately prepared
to do it either by their professional education or by their prior experience in schools”
(p. 3). However, there is very little empirical research on effective methods of
providing professional development in specific scientific-based knowledge and skills
as it relates to reading instruction (Gersten, Chard, & Baker, 2000). Chard (2004)
points out that what is particularly missing from the research are studies that examine
the effect of teacher training on student outcomes. This statement also falls in-line
with Kirkpatrick’s levels of evaluation, where the higher and more intricate the
evaluation, the more difficult it is to collect data. Chard’s (2004) statement on the
need for accountability of student outcomes as a result of teacher professional
development would fall under the highest level of Kirkpatrick’s framework.
Chard (2004), when researching professional development on reading
instruction, used Gilbert’s (1978) framework, which is comprised of three variables:
information, instrumentation, and motivation, to help ensure and anchor the training

48
received by teachers. Gilbert (1978) stressed that these system variables were of
higher priority than person variables because the system sets the environment for
individual competence to be developed. Individual competence will be the most
supported if given under these three variables of information, instrumentation, and
motivation.
The first system variable Gilbert (1978) stresses is information. This is
related to the improvement in competence and having shared values and agreement
on the measurable outcomes. This variable also relates to establishing a process for
collecting data to assess student reading performance. It is important to note that the
value and measureable outcomes should be those that are proximal to the teacher and
student behavior and is responsive to daily instruction. For example, if a teacher is
focusing on decoding and teaching those skills to read unfamiliar words to the
students then the measures should indicate progress in learning to read targeted
words. “Effective professional development would link training and implementation
of progress monitoring tools that related to the instructional elements of reading that
are essential at that grade level” (Chard, 2004, p. 179).
The second system variable from Gilbert (1978) is instrumentation and
includes all the tools that are available for reading instruction. These tools can be
instructional materials, time, personnel support, and technology. Research indicates
the need to have core reading materials that include explicit instructional strategies,
coordinated instructional sequences, and ample practice in aligned student materials.
Chard (2004) suggests that, “the relation between professional development and the

49
tools used to teach reading is underestimated” (p. 180). Teacher practices are
dependent upon their instructional tools and by not providing effective tools, teacher
effectiveness will be next to impossible.
Gilbert’s (1978) third system variable is motivation and incentives for
professional improvement. Many times, the success or failure of implementation
efforts can be whether there are appropriate incentives to support the use of the new
knowledge and skills. Chard (2004) identifies some of the motivators as the
following:
• Development of a support network that included other teachers using the
instructional practice.
• Principal support for the instructional practice.
• Documentation that students were benefitting from the practice.
• Student acceptance of the instructional practice.
• Flexibility in modifying and adapting the practice.
• Materials readily available to use.
• Instructional practices enhanced outcomes on high-stakes assessments. (p.
181)
Having closely aligned instructional tools to the measured outcomes can help to
result in improved reading achievement for the vast majority of learners (Chard,
2004).
As Gilbert’s (1978) framework provides a setting for individual gains to be
made, the person variables that Chard (2004) cite as imperative to successful

50
implementation of professional development for reading are: teacher knowledge,
teacher capacity, and teachers’ sense of self-efficacy. Gilbert (1978) emphasizes that
these individual competencies can develop if professional development for reading
instruction is given in the broader context of the system variables. One of the main
ideas that Chard (2004) identifies in being the most helpful in implementation of the
professional development is, “all teachers have highly structured learning
experiences on how to teach struggling readers successfully in an intervention
context under the careful supervision of a well-trained reading coach” (p. 185).
Chard (2004) further expands and suggests that under ideal circumstances,
implementation opportunities will include practice with students in the classroom
and should include coaching with feedback to ensure the practices are implemented
in the most effective manner.
Discussion
From the literature reviewed, there are six conclusions we can draw about
effective professional development. These six are:
• Effective professional development is sustained and intensive rather than
short, learning opportunities (Garet et al., 2001).
• Workshops that focused on the implementation of research-based
instructional practices, involved active-learning experiences for
participants, and provided teachers with opportunities to adapt the
practices to their own classroom settings worked (Guskey & Yoon,
2009).

51
• It was also determined that outside experts who constitute program
authors or researchers who presented ideas directly to teachers and then
helped to facilitate implementation was also effective (Guskey & Yoon,
2009).
• Effective professional development requires extensive time that is well
organized, structured, purposefully directed and focused on content,
pedagogy, or both (Quick, Holtzman, & Chaney, 2009; Shulman, 1986).
• Teachers need time to practice their new skills or strategies with
structured and sustained follow-up for support and guidance (Quick,
Holtzman, & Chaney, 2009).
• The most effective professional development comes from careful
adaptation of practices to specific content, process and context elements
(National Staff Development Council, 2001).
The above list is far from complete, but it does provide a starting point for
professional development.
There are some aspects of professional development that have been
overlooked in the research. Guskey (2000) specifically looks at four aspects where
more attention and data collection is needed. These areas include the following:
• People responsible for planning and implementing professional
development must know how to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of
their program.

52
• Schools or educators who are seeking the professional development need
to demand strong evidence from the people giving the training of their
strategies and practices.
• Implementation of new skills or strategies should be done in a small,
controlled manner.
• A lot more research needs to be done on professional development.
Millions, if not billions of dollars go to professional development and it
would behoove the public to know the most effective way to maximize
money input for student learning and achievement.
Current Study
The current study is important to the research on professional development
because, as Joyce and Showers (1981) point out, coaching and support is necessary
for successful implementation of professional development and ultimately student
achievement. This study will attempt to show the perception teachers have on
coaching and the effective implementation of professional development skills
learned.
This study addresses some of the holes in the literature reviewed. There have
been studies done on coaching as a successful tool for implementation of
professional development on campus; however, the literature also shows that the
research on supporting coaching’s effectiveness is inconclusive (Reeves, 2007).
Sherman and Freas (2004) found only 131 peer-reviewed studies since 1937 on
coaching. Of the 131 studies, only 56 were empirical and even fewer met standards

53
of reliability (Sherman & Freas, 2004). This study will attempt to add more
substantive evidence to the thin body of research on coaching and successful
professional development implementation. It will also try to find a relationship
between teachers and the support they perceive to be the most helpful in
implementing new strategies and skills.

54
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to explore elementary school teachers’
professional development training, follow up, and perception of support as it relates
to implementation of the new skills and knowledge gained from the training to their
classrooms. Specifically, the training that was used was the Building Reading
Foundation Skills for Diverse Learners, geared toward K-3 teachers. The training
was given to two Oahu district areas. Within the two districts, a total of 18
elementary schools were used for this study. In this study, teachers from the schools
participated in the Building Reading Foundation Skills for Diverse Learners training.
The research questions that framed this study are:
• To what degree do participating teachers believe the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training aligns with their school,
personal, and state goals and does this belief change over time?
• What is the relationship between participating in the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners professional development training
and teacher efficacy?
• Do teachers who participate in the Building Foundation Reading Skills
for Diverse Learners training have more knowledge and skills after
participating in the training? If so, were the teachers able to retain what
they have learned?

55
• What is the relationship between the supports participants feel they need
to implement what they have learned from the professional development
training to their respective campuses and what is actually taking place?
• What is the relationship between teachers’ perceived support and the
transfer of new knowledge and skills gained from the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners to the classroom?
Research Method and Design
Inquiry of the research questions was conducted through a mixed methods
research design, defined by Tashakkori and Teddlike (2003) as the use of both
qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis in either sequential or
concurrent phases of the study. A mixed methods approach of data collection and
analysis allowed for a more complete coverage of the complexity of the situation.
Creswell (2003) concurs with a mixed method design when a study is faced with
various factors such as design, implementation, and evaluation of a professional
development program. Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998) agree and state that research
methods, variables, and analysis are chosen because they are the most appropriate for
finding an answer to the question that was posed for the study. Utilizing qualitative
and quantitative methods expanded the breadth and scope of the study to give a more
complete picture. This section of the chapter will discuss the qualitative,
quantitative, mixed methods design, and also discuss the knowledge paradigms that
support each approach.

56
Creswell (2003) describes the importance of qualitative research as a means
for the researcher to immerse him/herself in the everyday life of the setting that is
being studied. It is an inquiry process of understanding where the researcher can
develop complete pictures, detailed reports, and most importantly, conduct the study
in a natural setting rather than a contrived location. This type of research is derived
from the advocacy/participatory model (Mertens, 2003). Researchers within this
model believe that knowledge is socially constructed through an individual’s
interactions and engagement with the people and the world. Patton (2002) agrees
with Creswell (2003) in that qualitative research is inductive and meaning is
generated from the data that are collected in the natural setting and analysis of the
data are supported by the perceptions and values of the participants.
Conversely, the objective of quantitative research is a more definitive
approach to inquiry that relies upon classification and statistical paradigms to explain
the research that was conducted (Creswell, 2003). Creswell (2003) states that
quantitative research determines the outcomes and/or effects of a certain cause. The
foundation of data collection in quantitative research is to use controlled experiments
to determine cause and effect relationships. Those who adhere to quantitative
research for their studies believe that the world is dictated by laws or theories that
can be tested and verified through a scientific means. Outcomes or data from the
study are supported by the premise that knowledge is based on observation and
measurement of objective reality. By isolating variables, causal relationships can be
discovered. The validity and reliability in quantitative research depends on random

57
assignment, tedious construction of the research instruments, and standardization of
procedures to determine whether a causal relationship does in fact exist that can be
then generalized across different situations. Ensuring that the study can be replicated
is also a key assumption to quantitative research. Creswell (2003) states that
quantitative methodology is limited because it relies on carefully designed constructs
before data are collected.
By using a mixed method approach, the benefits of qualitative and
quantitative designs are merged. Creswell (2003) describes a mixed methods
approach as pragmatic because researchers who use a mixed method approach are
concerned with solutions to problems and what, in fact, works best. Creswell (2003)
further concludes that a mixed methods approach provides the best understanding of
the research study because it can examine a much broader perspective.
It is important to note that mixed methods designs are only marginally mixed
(Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). Mixed model research designs are mixed in majority
or all stages of the study whereas in mixed method designs, qualitative and
quantitative methods are only used in data collection and analysis. Usually, the type
of research questions asked and the inferences that are made at the end of the study
are either qualitative or quantitative (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). This particular
study used a mixed methods approach. The data collection and analysis used both
qualitative and quantitative methods, but the research questions for the study and
implications were primarily quantitative.

58
There are five purposes for conducting a mixed method study as cited by
Greene, Caracelli, and Graham (1989). One of the major goals for a mixed method
study is to “multi-task”. By utilizing multiple methods of data collection and
analysis, there is a larger breadth of the study that can be looked at, studied, and
analyzed for information. Greene et al. (1989) recommend two essential elements
for a mixed method design; the empirical work should be encompassed within a
single study and the phenomena should be distinct. The term phenomena refers to
the degree to which qualitative and quantitative methods are being used to asses
either separate phenomena or the same phenomena. Studies similar to the current
study often use mixed methodology. The qualitative methods are used to explore the
process and quantitative methods are used to measure the outcomes (Greene,
Caracelli, & Graham, 1989; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). These designs have the
potential to provide researchers with solid data to make clearer inferences and
conclusions.
There are three issues that need to be noted when designing a mixed methods
approach; priority, implementation, and integration (Cresswell, Plano Clark,
Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003). First, priority references which method, either
qualitative or quantitative, is given primary emphasis in the study being conducted.
Second, implementation refers to whether qualitative and quantitative data collection
and analysis are conducted at the same time or in a specific order. Third, integration
is the phase of the research process where integration of qualitative and quantitative
data occurs. The current study will use a mixed methods design where qualitative

59
and quantitative data will be collected at the same time. Both qualitative and
quantitative data will be integrated during the analysis phase of the research
questions.
In the current study, the professional development facilitators and creators
were interviewed qualitatively to explore the organization’s and the facilitator’s
purposes and goals for the training. Quantitative surveys assessed teacher efficacy,
teacher learning, knowledge transfer, and perception of the level of support, were
administered to the participants of the professional development. This approach
expanded the scope of the study by utilizing multiple methods, as concluded by
Greene et al. (1989) and also gave the researcher the ability to study different groups
within the design (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1989).
Research Procedures
Setting and Participants
There are 11 public elementary schools in the Aloha district (pseudonym) and
7 public elementary schools in the Laulima district (pseudonym) located in the State
of Hawaii. These 18 elementary schools are part of the Hawaii State Department of
Education and were picked for this study because these schools participated in the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners (BFRSDL) training. This
particular professional development training program is given on request from
schools or districts and was selected for this study because of the easy access the
author had to the developers/facilitators of the training program. The schools in the
study provide elementary education for students in K-5
th
grade. The participants for

60
the professional development program involved in this study are teachers,
counselors, or administrators from these 18 public elementary schools. The actual
breakdown of demographics will be discussed in Chapter Four.
These educators were selected to be the participants of this particular study as
they received the BFRSDL training. The schools that were part of this training,
requested, of their own accord to participate in the BFRSDL professional
development program. The BFRSDL professional development program was started
by the Department of Education many years ago and were revised throughout the
years. Through networking, the educators within the Department of Education have
heard about the training from each other and it is through the educators’ own
requests that the training is then given.
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners
The Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training
followed a specific training schedule. The only facilitators of the training were
trainers 1 and 2 to ensure fidelity across trainings. The primary objective of the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training course was to
provide teacher-participants with the scientific research-based knowledge and skills
necessary to teach beginning reading effectively. Teacher-participants increased their
understanding of three essential components of beginning reading: phonemic
awareness, alphabetic principle (phonics/word study), and fluency. They learned to
translate research into practice. Teacher-participants learned to design effective
lessons, evaluate/enhance current practices, and practice research-based reading

61
strategies. Teacher-participants also increased their knowledge of explicit and
systematic instruction and learn strategies to keep students actively engaged during
instruction. This was not training in a specific reading program. Instead, strategies
taught were designed to support and enhance any reading program being
implemented at a school. The content of this training was appropriate for diverse
populations of learners — second language, special education, at-risk, and/or the
economically disadvantaged.
Outcomes for teacher-participants who complete this training include the
following:
T1. Identify the big ideas in beginning reading (Phonemic Awareness,
Alphabetic Principle, Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension) and
describe the essential components of phonemic awareness,
phonics/word study, and fluency.
T2. Design new and/or enhance existing lesson plans in phonological
awareness, attending to critical instructional factors (e.g., systematic
and explicit instruction, continuum of phonological awareness skills,
example selection, etc.)
T3. Design new and/or enhance existing lesson plans in phonics/word
study, attending to critical instructional factors (e.g. systematic and
explicit instruction, sequence of letter/sound introduction, progression
of regular word types, irregular words, structural analysis, multisyllabic
words, preskills for reading connected text, spelling, etc.)

62
T4. Design new and/or enhance existing lesson plans in fluency, attending
to critical instructional factors (e.g., appropriate introduction of fluency
building, selection of materials, when and how to build prosody, etc.).
T5. Deliver explicit and systematic lessons in phonological awareness,
phonics/word study, fluency building and spelling, incorporating active
participation strategies.
T6. Select appropriate pre-post and progress monitoring assessments that
measure critical skills in phonemic awareness, phonics/word study
skills and fluency. Design intervention and instruction that addresses
assessment results.
As teacher-participants meet the intended outcomes of this course, the
following student outcomes should be more evident in the classroom. Students
should be able to more proficiently:
S1. Blend, segment and manipulate phonemes when presented with oral
prompts.
S2. Use knowledge of sound-symbol associations and the sounding out
strategy to accurately read phonetically regular words.
S3. Read high frequency words with increased accuracy and fluency.
S4. Use multisyllabic word reading strategies and structural clues to
accurately read multisyllabic words, contractions, possessives, and
words with inflectional endings.
S5. Utilize sentence structure and context to verify decoding accuracy.

63
S6. Spell words more accurately by using the strategy of segmenting or
chunking words.
S7. Read connected text with increased fluency and prosody.
Professional Development Design
The Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training was
typically delivered over four full days and generally runs from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
daily, with 15 minutes of breaks and a 45 minute lunch. There was 24 hours of
contact time and an estimated 6 hours of optional homework if the school agrees to
this requirement. Though the training can be conducted over four consecutive days,
the ideal configuration is to have two consecutive days, a break of about one or two
weeks (time for teachers to implement strategies in their classrooms), then the final
two consecutive days. Other delivery designs include four Saturdays with classroom
implementation between sessions. Schools may choose to write up this training for
Professional Development (PD) credit.
The instructors for the trainings were Trainer 1 and Trainer 2 who are
consultants with Teach Well, LLC. Sessions included interactive lectures, lesson
demonstrations and videos, practice and feedback, and group work. Agendas for
each day of training are shown in Table 1. Follow-up sessions and classroom
coaching of teachers may be arranged.

64
Table 1
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners Training
Date Topics
Day 1 • Overview and Expectations
• Systematic and Explicit Instruction
• Instructional Design and Delivery
• Big Ideas in Beginning Reading Instruction
• Phonological Awareness: Critical Features
• Effective Strategies for Teaching Phonological Awareness
Day 2 • Review of Day 1
• Designing and/or Enhancing Phonological Awareness Lessons
• Assessing Phonological Awareness Skills and Using Assessment
Results to Drive Instruction
• Alphabetic Principle: Critical Features
• Effective Strategies for Teaching the Alphabetic Principle
(Phonics/Word Study)
Day 3 • Review of Days 1 and 2
• Designing and/or Enhancing Phonics/Word Study Lessons for Word
Reading and Reading in Texts
• Assessing Phonics/Word Study Skills and Using Assessment Results to
Drive Instruction
Day 4 • Review of Days 1, 2 and 3
• Automaticity and Fluency: Critical Features
• Effective strategies for teaching Automaticity and Fluency
• Designing Effective Automaticity and Fluency Lessons
• Assessing Fluency and Using Assessment Results to Drive Instruction
• Putting It All Together

65
Logistics
The ideal class size is a maximum of 30 teacher-participants. Due to the
highly interactive nature of the training, larger class sizes would require additional
personnel to assist with the training.
Training materials include a training binder and a book of Instructional
Routines specifically designed to go with this training for each participant.
Recommended resources may be purchased by the school for teachers. Schools are
requested to provide and set up a training site, an LCD projector, chart paper and
stand.
Evidence of Previous Success
The training was conducted by Trainer 1 and Trainer 2. Both were teachers
and consultants who have had extensive experience in teaching, coaching, in staff
development and curriculum development. Resumes for both instructors are
available upon request.
Both Trainer 1 and Trainer 2 were lead trainers for the Kindergarten, Gr. 1,
Gr. 2, and Gr. 3 Teacher Reading Academies and have trained trainers and hundreds
of K-3 teachers statewide since 2004. They have also presented the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training to hundreds of teachers
statewide since 1999 and continue to receive requests to provide this training. This
training was funded by the Title II grant as a PD course through the University of
Hawaii for summer of 2009. It was also supported by the grant to provide two

66
sessions in January/February 2010 and March/April 2010 with 30 teachers in each
session on Oahu.
Trainer 1 and Trainer 2 have also individually and together presented
workshops and trainings statewide on such topics as Systematic and Explicit
Instruction, Vocabulary, and Data Analysis. Both instructors train teachers,
paraprofessionals, and parents on a variety of literacy related topics. Their
workshops and trainings have received exemplary reviews from participants and
program sponsors.
Instrumentation
Pre- and post- survey.
A brief 15 minute survey were administered to participants prior to the
BFRSDL training and also immediately following the training. A follow-up survey
was also administered to the same participants after one month of completing the
BFRSDL training. Survey items covered four areas: (1) teacher demographics, (2)
teacher self-efficacy, (3) teacher knowledge about BFRSDL, and (4) support for
implementation of BFRSDL skills.
Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale. Teacher efficacy was measured through
the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale. These questions are taken from the Teacher
Sense of Efficacy Scale – Short Form (TSES; Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy,
2001; see Appendix A). This scale is comprised of 12 items and uses a 9-point
Likert scale. It measures teacher efficacy in the following areas: (1) Efficacy in
Instructional Strategies; (2) Efficacy in Student Engagement; and (3) Efficacy in

67
Classroom Management. The Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale has the ability to be
used to compare teachers across a variety of contexts, grade levels, and subjects
because it has a unified and stable factor structure. The scale also encompasses a
wide range of teaching skills and responsibilities.
The Likert scale that the Teacher Sense of Efficacy Scale utilizes has the
following anchors: 1 = Not at All, 3 = Very Little, 5 = Some degree, 7 = Quite a Bit,
and 9 = A Great Deal. In order to determine Efficacy in Classroom Management,
Efficacy in Instructional Strategies, and Efficacy in Student Engagement, subscale
scores will be computed. Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk-Hoy (2001) grouped the
questions in the following way:
Efficacy in Student Engagement: Items 2, 4, 7, 11
Efficacy in Instructional Strategies: Items 5, 9, 10, 12
Efficacy in Classroom Management: Items 1, 3, 6, 8
Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk-Hoy (2001) reported the reliabilities shown in
Table 2 from their study.

68
Table 2
Teacher Efficacy Results from Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk-Hoy (2001)
Mean SD alpha
Teacher Self Efficacy Scale 7.1 0.98 0.90
Engagement 7.2 1.2 0.81
Instruction 7.3 1.2 0.86
Management 6.7 1.2 0.86

Teacher Activity Survey.
Items from the Teacher Activity Survey (Garet, Birman, Porter, Desimone, &
Herman, 1999; see Appendix B) were adapted for use for the purpose of this study.
The survey asked teachers about their teaching community, professional
development activities, description of the professional development activity,
effectiveness of the professional development activity and the ability of the activity
to influence teacher’s knowledge and practice, and teacher demographics.
Follow-up surveys.
A follow-up survey was given to the participants of the BFRDL training after
one month of the conclusion of the activity. The survey asked teachers to rate the
effectiveness of the BFRDL training, their sense of self-efficacy, sustained
knowledge and skills from the training, and identify instructional support they are or
are not receiving for implementation purposes.

69
Interview.
One interview was conducted for the current study. The professional
development trainers/facilitators/developers were interviewed to establish the need
for the development of the training, the theories underlying the training, the structure
of the training, and best practices following the training. The interview provided the
foundation for development of this particular professional development program.
The information from the interview established whether the training was based on
adult learning theory, considered follow-up and coaching, and encompassed the
necessary elements of effective professional development training found from the
review of the literature. Overall, the interview was used to broaden the
understanding of the professional development training being offered to the
participants.
The interview protocol that was utilized included questions that encompassed
four key areas: (1) development of the professional development training; (2)
structure of the professional development training; (3) adult learning; and (4) best
practices for implementation of newly acquired skills and knowledge (see Appendix
C). Questions were open-ended and included sub-questions during the interview.
Procedure of Data Collection Method
The interview of the professional development developer(s)/facilitator(s) was
held before the start of the school year, prior to the training, and also prior to the
distribution of the survey. The interview lasted approximately 40 minutes long.
Interviews were conducted in the following manner: (1) researcher introduction; (2)

70
overview of the current study; (3) assurance of confidentiality; (4) explanation of the
interview format; and (5) semi-structured interview questions.
Researcher and/or facilitator hand distributed the pre-test survey at the start
of the professional development training to participants. A post-test survey was hand
distributed to the participants at the end of the professional development training.
The follow-up survey was delivered, via Survey Monkey Online Survey tool, to all
participants of the BFRSDL training one month after the conclusion of their training.
Access to the survey was available for four weeks. Weekly email reminders to the
teachers was sent until the survey closed.
All respondents were assigned an identification number to allow pre-, post-,
and follow-up survey responses to be linked.
Controls for Researcher Bias
Recognizing the need for research in the area of coaching and follow-up after
a professional development training, the researcher initiated the proposed study with
the understanding that she would guard against personal bias as a result of knowing
the developers/facilitators/trainers of the professional development program. The
study was supported by the developers/facilitators/trainers and the administration,
staff, and faculty of the elementary schools in the study with the understanding that
the research that will be conducted was intended to examine the teacher perceptions
about the usefulness of coaching as it relates to implementation of the new skills and
knowledge received from professional development training.

71
Data Analysis
The sample used for this study were the teachers from the 18 public
elementary schools in the Aloha and Laulima school districts participating in the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners professional development
training. Not included in the sample, but still imperative to the study was the
information gathered from the interview of the developer/facilitator of the training.
The evidence from the interview was used to provide the foundation for this
professional development program. Analysis on the pre-, post-, and post- surveys
was done as it relates to each research question. Table 3 includes the five research
questions driving this dissertation study and matches each question with the survey
questions tied to answering them. The third column on the table includes the data
analysis that will be run to find relationships among the responses. The two types of
data analyses that were conducted are t-tests and chi-square. The t-test is designed to
show whether the means of two groups are statistically different from one another.
The chi-square test compares observed data with data we would expect to obtain
according to a specific hypothesis.

72
Table 3
Research Questions, Survey Questions and Data Analysis
Research Question
Survey and Item
Numbers Data Analysis Test
To what degree do participating
teachers believe the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners training aligns with their
school, personal, and state goals and
does this belief change over time?
Kirkpatrick level 1
Pre-test Question 6
Post-test 1 Question 2
Post-test 2 Question2
T-test analysis of data collected.
What is the relationship between
participating in the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners professional development
training and teacher efficacy?
Kirkpatrick level 2
Pre-test Question 12
Post-test 1 Question 9
Post-test 2 Question 13
T-test analysis of data collected.
Do teachers who participate in the
Building Foundation Reading Skills
for Diverse Learners training have
more knowledge and skills after
participating in the training? If so,
were the teachers able to retain what
they have learned? Kirkpatrick level 2
Post-test 1 Question 4
Post test 2 Question 3
T-test analysis of data collected.
What is the relationship between what
supports participants feel they need to
implement what they have learned
from the professional development
training to their respective campuses
and what is actually taking place?
Kirkpatrick level 3
Post-test 2 Question 5
compared to Post-test 2
Questions 6, 7, 8 and
Post-test 2 Questions 9,
10, 11
Chi-square analysis of data
collected along with “search”
function on Microsoft Word to
find patterns and similarities
across response sets for
Questions 9, 10, and 11 on Post-
test 2 as it relates to frequency
of follow-up and perception of
follow-up effectiveness.
What is the relationship between
teachers’ perceptions of the
effectiveness of their coach and their
ability to transfer the skills gained
from the Building Foundation Reading
Skills for Diverse Learners training to
the classroom? Kirkpatrick level 3
Post-test 1 Questions 6,
7, 8
Post-test 2 Questions 5,
6, 7, 8
Post-test 2 Questions 9,
10, 11
Chi-square analysis of data
collected along with “search”
function on Microsoft Word to
find patterns and similarities
across response sets for
Questions 9, 10, and 11 on Post-
test 2 as it relates to perceived
support and transfer of
knowledge and skills.

73
Coding
The researcher used the search function of the Microsoft Word software to
find themes identified in the open-ended response sets and one interview that was
conducted. After the coding was completed, the text of the open response questions
and interview was interrupted by the researcher to develop the clearest meaning of
the participants’ experiences so that the meaning of the participants’ words is
expressed in the manner it is meant to. The researcher guarded against taking the
text analyzed out of context of the respective participant’s response to the open-
ended questions by matching participant responses to those of the other participant
sub-populations. In order to gain the deepest meaning and understanding of the
open-ended questions and interview, the researcher reinforced her appreciation of
each response by personally transcribing each response and the interview. The
researcher then coded each open-ended response and interview answers followed by
a detailed analysis of each response and gave the coded themes character and life.
Finally, the results of the open-ended response and interview analysis was
juxtaposed by sub-group population to answer the research questions.
The interpretation of the complementary parts of the differing perceptions of
the participants was controlled for and disaggregated by coding key words, phrases,
and ideas according to the Kirkpatrick framework (2004).

74
Variables of the Study
The variables that was examined in this study point toward teacher perception
of the coach’s role and the successful implementation of new skills and knowledge
acquired through professional development. The variables for this study were:
• Relationship of professional development training to school goals.
• Teacher perception of professional development skills.
• Teacher prior knowledge of professional development skills.
• Teacher perception of new knowledge and skills of professional
development.
• Teacher self-efficacy prior to professional development.
• Teacher self-efficacy after professional development.
• Teacher self-efficacy after implementation of professional development
in classroom.
• Teacher perception of support on implementation of professional
development skills.
• Teacher perception on the frequency of support and follow-up
effectiveness.
These variables were examined in the research portion of this study. The findings
from the study will hopefully address the holes in the current literature on
professional development.

75
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
As stated in the previous chapters, the purpose of this study was to explore
elementary school teachers’ professional development training, follow-up, and
perception of support as they relate to the implementation of the new skills and
knowledge gained from the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Leaners
training in their classrooms. Specifically, this study looked at the relationships
between the training and the following outcomes: alignment with school goals, self-
reported teacher efficacy, retention and application of knowledge and skills learned,
and participants’ perceptions of support. It was the intent of this study to look at the
relationship between Levels 1, 2, and 3 of Kirkpatrick’s (2004) model: reactions,
learning, and transfer with participation in the Building Foundation Reading Skills
for Diverse Learners training.
The first section of Chapter Four will report on participant characteristics
including position, years of experience, and education level. The following section
will report the analysis of the data as it pertains to each of the five research questions
of this study. Discussion of the results will follow in Chapter Five.
Descriptive Results
A total of 50 pre-test, 50 post-test 1, and 50 post-test 2 surveys were
administered to participants in-person or online. The participants were teachers from
18 different public elementary schools from two different school complex areas on
Oahu. Of the 50 participants, 46 completed the pre-test, 30 completed the first post-

76
test, and 20 completed the second post-test. Only 14 of the second post-tests
contained a complete answer set. This study will mainly focus on the 14 matched
pre-test, post-test 1, and post-test 2 results. These respondents represented 30.4% of
the total participants surveyed. The response rates are presented in Table 4.

Table 4
Response Rates
Survey Type
Response Rate
N = 50
Pre-test Survey 92%
Post-test 1 Survey 60%
Post-test 2 Survey 40%
Matched Pre-/Post 2 Survey 28%

Matched Pre-Test and Post-Test Sample
Table 5 provides a demographic breakdown of the sample population. As
mentioned earlier, the participants were from 18 public elementary schools from two
separate complex areas and two districts within the island of Oahu. Along with
position, education level is also reported (see Table 5). The participants reported a
small range of educational backgrounds. Of the 46 respondents to the pre-survey,
almost 60% (57.1%) reported having a Master’s degree and the rest of the
participants held Baccalaureate degrees.

77
Table 5
Sample Demographics Pre-test
Type
Percentage
N = 46
Job Position
Teacher, Grade K 35.7%
Teacher, Grade 1 28.6%
Teacher, Grade 2 7.1%
Teacher, Other 14.3%
Curriculum Coordinator/Academic Coach 14.3%
Education Level
Bachelor’s Degree 42.9%
Master’s Degree 57.1%

The participants in the study reported years of experience in their current
jobs. There was a range between 0-10 years with a mean of 2.27 years (SD = 2.761).
Participants also reported their years of experience in education. Years of experience
in the field ranged from 0-30 years with a mean of 10.52 (SD = 10.071). Of the
respondents, 85.7% had less than five years of experience in their current position
and 50% had been in the educational field five years or less.
A chi-square analysis indicated that although there were only 14 matched
pre-test, post-test 1, and post-test 2, the sample represented the entire target
population that participated in the training. Chi-square analysis between the entire

78
sample and the matched sample revealed no differences on job type or education
level. Independent Samples T-tests also showed no significant differences in years
of experience in respondents’ current job and years of experience in the education
field between the matched sample size and total sample population. Much of this
insignificant difference can be attributed to the very small sample and matched
sample size.
Table 6 shows the sample breakdown of population on post-test 1. Table 7
shows the sample breakdown of population on post-test 2.

Table 6
Sample Demographics – Post-test 1
Type
Percentage
N = 30
Job Position
Teacher, Grade K 32.4%
Teacher, Grade 1 18.9%
Teacher, Grade 2 10.8%
Teacher, Other 18.9%
Curriculum Coordinator/Academic Coach 5.4%
Missing 18.9%
Education Level
Bachelor’s Degree 29.7%
Master’s Degree 51.4%
Missing 18.9%

79
Table 7
Sample Demographics – Post-test 2
Type
Percentage
N = 14
Job Type
Teacher, Grade K 25.0%
Teacher, Grade 1 20.0%
Teacher, Grade 2 15.0%
Teacher, Other 10.0%
Curriculum Coordinator/Academic Coach 10.0%
Missing 20%
Education Level
Bachelor’s Degree 40.0%
Master’s Degree 40.0%
Missing 20.0%

Findings
Five research questions guided this study. The following sections will report
on the findings and analyses to the questions.
Findings and Analysis Related to Research Question 1
Research Question 1: To what degree do participating teachers believe the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training aligns with their
school, personal, and state goals and does this perception change over time? This
question aligns with Kirkpatrick’s Level 1: reaction.

80
Pre-test, post-test 1, and post-test 2 surveys contained four questions related
to the above research question and used a 4-point Likert scale response: 1 = none at
all, 2 = to some degree, 3 = quite a bit, and 4 = always. A Paired samples t-test
analysis of the data showed that there was no statistical difference in teachers’
perception about the alignment of the training from the pre-test to post-test 2. The
time lapsed between the pre-test and post-test two was 60 days. Table 8 shows the
mean and standard deviation for each question. Participants went into the
professional development program believing it would be highly aligned with
personal, school, and state goals and completed the professional development
program believing it to be highly aligned.

Table 8
Participants Perception of the Professional Development Activity
Question
To what extent do you believe the PC activity is …
Pre-Test
M(SD)
Post Test
M(SD)
Consistent with our own goals for your professional
development?
3.54 (.66) 3.85 (.38)
Consistent with your school’s/ department’s goal to
change practice?
3.42 (.67) 3.42 (.79)
Designed to support state or district
standards/curriculum frameworks?
3.62 (.51) 3.54 (.66)
Designed to support state or district assessment? 3.33 (.78) 3.42 (.79)

81
Findings and Analysis Related to Research Question 2
Research Question 2: What is the relationship between participating in the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners professional development
training and teacher self-efficacy? This question aligns with Kirkpatrick Level 1:
reaction.
Teachers’ sense of self-efficacy was measured through the Teacher Sense of
Efficacy Scale – Short Form (TSES; Tschannen-Moran and Woolfolk Hoy, 2001).
Analysis of the TSES reveals that the total scale and subscales – engagement,
strategies, and classroom management are highly reliable with this study’s sample.
A full-scale analysis of TSES showed a Chronbach’s alpha of .908. With respect to
the engagement, strategies, and classroom management subscales, Chronbach’s
alpha resulted in .804, .839, and .804, all suggesting this measurement was highly
reliable.
According to the self-reported efficacy scores on the TSES, pre-test results
showed that majority of the participants were fairly confident in their abilities with
respect to student engagement, implementing strategies, and classroom management.
Scores ranged from 5.0, represented on the TSES as “some degree”, to 9.0,
represented as “a great deal” with a mean of 6.70 and a SD of .90. These results
followed a normal distribution curve represented on the histogram shown in Figure
1. The subscale scores were parallel to the total results.

82

Figure 1. Histogram of Total SE Scores

Respondents’ efficacy was measured in three major areas: (1) Efficacy in
Student Engagement, (2) Efficacy in Instructional Strategies, and (3) Efficacy in
Classroom Management. The anchors used for each question were as follows: 1 =
Not at All, 3 = Very Little, 5 = Some Degree, 7 = Quite a Bit, and 9 = A Great Deal.
Table 9 represents the Mean and Standard Deviation scores for the Pre-test, Post-test
1, and Post-test.

83
Table 9
Pre-, Post-1, and Post-2 Scores for TSES
Scale
Pre-Test
M(SD)
Post-Test 1
M(SD)
Post-Test 2
M(SD)
Total 6.7 (.89) 7.19 (.94) 7.30 (.85)
Student Engagement 6.67 (1.00) 7.02 (1.05) 7.16 (1.12)
Instructional Strategies 6.64 (.98) 7.30 (.89) 7.16 (.80)
Classroom Management 6.85 (1.05) 7.19 (.94) 7.30 (.85)

The descriptive analyses indicate that teachers reported moderately high
levels of efficacy overall and on the three subscales on the pre-test. Furthermore,
teachers’ reported sense of efficacy apparently increased after the training and
continued to increase one month after training ended.
Respondents’ pre- and post-1 efficacy scores were compared using Paired
samples T-tests. The Paired samples T-tests revealed statistical differences on
Instructional Strategies (t(28) = 2.43, p = .022) and Total (t(28) = 2.07, p = .048),
TSES scores from pre-test to post-test 1. Thus, participants’ sense of efficacy in
Instructional Strategies statistically increased from pre-test to post-test 1 and
participants’ overall sense of efficacy statistically increased from pre-test to post-test
1. There were no statistical differences in the Student Engagement subscale and
Classroom Management subscale scores in pre-and post-1 scores.

84
The Paired samples T-test was also conducted on the pre-test and post-2
TSES scores. There were statistical differences between the pre-test and post-test 2
scores for the Total scale (t(14) = 2.35, p = .034) and the Instructional Strategies
subscale (t(14) = 2.19 p = .046). Again, participants’ sense of efficacy with respect
to Instructional Strategies increased from pre-test to post-test 2 and also participants’
overall sense of efficacy was higher from pre-test to post-test 2. There were no
statistical differences detected in Student Engagement and Classroom Management
subscale scores.
Findings and Analysis Related to Research Question 3
Research Question 3: Do teachers who participate in the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training have more knowledge and
skills after participating in the training? If so, were the teachers able to retain what
they have learned? This question aligns with Kirkpatrick’s Level 2: learning.
There was one knowledge question on each of the surveys. Participants were
asked to identify the five components of reading covered in the training they
received. Due to the possibility of multiple answers, the knowledge question was
examined individually to determine a correct or incorrect response. The total
number of correct answers was then calculated. Table 10 reflects the percentage of
participants with the correct answer to the knowledge question on the pre-test, post-
test 1, and post-test 2. Results indicated an increase of knowledge from pre-test to
post-test 1, given right after the training, and a slight decline on post-test 2, given
one month after the conclusion of the training.

85
Table 10
Percentage of Participants with Correct Response
Question
Pre-test
N = 46
Post-test 1
N = 30
Post-test 2
N = 14
Identify the five components of
reading as covered in the training.
14.3% 50% 42.9%

The Paired samples T-test further indicated the difference shown on the
knowledge of participants from pre-test to post-test 1 and pre-test to post-test 2 was
statistically significant. There was a difference from pre-test to post-test 1, t(13) = -
2.69, p = .019 and a statistically significant difference from pre-test to post-test 2,
t(12) = -2.31, p = .040. The Paired samples T-test confirms that the increase of
participant knowledge after participating in the Building Foundation Reading Skills
for Diverse Leaners training was not due to chance.
Findings and Analysis Related to Research Question 4
Research Question 4: What is the relationship between what supports
participants feel they need to implement what they have learned from the
professional development training to their respective campuses and what is actually
taking place? This question begins to scratch the surface of Kirkpatrick’s Level 3:
transfer.
Participants were asked on the post-test 1 survey what they needed to help
implement what they learned in the training to their classroom, the types of support
they expect, and how important certain supports are to them. Those questions were

86
then compared to questions on the post-test 2. On post-test 2, participants were then
asked implementation questions, whether or not they received support in their
classroom for implementation of skills learned, frequency of support, and was the
support enough.
A descriptive analyses of the data revealed that one of the top responses
(71.4%) to what respondents needed to implement what they learned was coaching
with feedback, either by trainers or instructional coaches. According to the
participants, one of the supports even more important than coaching was
Administrative support (85.8%). Descriptive analyses further revealed that although
coaching was needed, majority of the respondents did not expect any support to
occur after the training. Table 11 shows the percentage of respondents who felt
certain types of support were important to them.

Table 11
Importance of Support – Post-test 1
Type of Support
Percentage Response
N = 30
Coaching 71.4%
Feedback 71.5%
Peer Mentoring 85.7%
Administrative Support 85.8%
Collegial Support 71.4%
Follow-up Training by trainers 71.5%

87
Descriptive analyses run on whether or not support was received indicated
that 71.4% of respondents did not receive any type of support following the training
either from peers, administration, or the trainers to help implement the skills and
knowledge learned from the professional development. The few respondents who
did receive coaching reported they received coaching once or twice since the end of
the training. Fifty percent of the respondents who received support felt that they
received enough support since the end of the training. These findings suggest that
participants reacted positively to the implementation experience and felt that follow-
up was important. However, few received any follow-up support and therefore many
felt that they did not receive enough support after the training. Table 12 reflects the
actual follow-up support teachers reported receiving post training.

Table 12
Actual Follow-up Support Received Post Training
Support
Percentage
N = 14
Received Support post training 21.4%
No Support post training 71.5%
Missing data 7.1%

88
Findings and Analysis Related to Research Question 5
Research Question 5: What is the relationship between teachers’ perceptions
of the effectiveness of their coach and their ability to transfer the skills gained from
the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training to the
classroom? This question aligns with Kirkpatrick’s Level 3: transfer.
Respondents were given open-ended questions on the second post-test that
asked them to report on the type of coaching or support they received, whether this
support helped or hindered their implementation, and also what was the most helpful
or least helpful about that support. The responses were placed into Microsoft Word,
coded, and analyzed to find patterns and similarities across response sets. Of the 14
matched pre-, post-1, and post-2 responses, 9 of the respondents felt that more
coaching and support was needed for them to help with the implementation of the
skills learned from the training. Of the three participants that received coaching, 2 of
the participants felt that the coach and support they did receive helped them to
implement successfully in the classroom because it provided timely feedback, other
ideas, and more time to practice with someone. Finally, 2 of the 3 who received
coaching felt their support or coach was helpful because they received specific
feedback for implementing in their classrooms.
Respondents were also asked to rate how comfortably they were able to
implement objectives as a result of the professional development they received.
Table 13 depicts statements and the percentage of respondents who agreed with
those statements.

89
Table 13
Implementation Response
Statement
Percentage
Agree
N = 14
I have been able to implement major objectives taught in a regular,
sustained fashion.
85.7%
As a result of implementing objectives of this professional
development, I have observed a positive impact on my general
education students.
85.7%
I consider the changes in my teaching and or student outcomes as a
result of implementing objectives of this professional development
as important and valuable.
85.7%
As a result of implementing objectives of this professional
development, I have observed a positive impact on my ELL
students.
71.4%
As a result of implementing objectives of this professional
development, I have observed a positive impact on my high poverty
students.
64.3%
As a result of implementing objectives of this professional
development, I have observed a positive impact on my special
education students.
50%

These results are important to note because participants felt most confident
about implementing the knowledge and skills they learned in the professional
development to their general education students (85.7%). About 71.4% of the
respondents felt comfortable implementing their new skills with ELL students,

90
64.3% implementing with low poverty students, and only half (50%) felt comfortable
implementing with special education students.
Summary of Findings
There are highlights from the findings and analyses of the data for the five
research questions that guided this study. Research question one asked if the training
aligned with participants’ personal, school, and district goals. The majority of the
respondents did feel the professional development training they received was aligned
and continued to feel that way even after the training. The second research question
examined teacher self-efficacy. Although there was no change in classroom
management and student engagement, there was a significant difference respondents
experienced in instructional strategies efficacy and total self-efficacy. Research
question three looked at knowledge and whether participants gained and retained the
information they received. The findings did show a significant increase in
knowledge right after and a month after training. The fourth question looked at the
relationship of what teachers feel they need to help them implement and what is
actually taking place. Participants reported that they felt coaching and support was
important to the implementation of new skills and knowledge; however, they were
not receiving that support when they went back to their campus. Yet, despite the
lack of support, participants felt they were able to implement the training objectives
in their classrooms. Finally, research question five examined the effectiveness of the
support teachers receive after the training and the ability to transfer the skills learned

91
to their classrooms. Respondents conveyed that more coaching and support was
needed but when they did receive coaching it helped in the implementation process.
Chapter Five will further analyze these findings and link the highlights of the
data with research-based evidence. Implications, next steps, and follow-up will also
be discussed.

92
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to explore elementary school teachers’
professional development training, follow-up, and perception of support as they
relate to the implementation of the new skills and knowledge gained from the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Leaners training in their classrooms.
In this chapter, the findings presented in Chapter Four will be examined
against the literature. Further discussion of the implications for practice will be
reviewed, and questions that remain unanswered will be brought to attention. A
review of the six conclusions of effective professional development, as determined in
Chapter Two, will open this section. A detailed look at the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training program and development of the
program will be included in this review. The development and structure of the
professional development program is a critical piece to the evaluation of the data
discoveries because it can reveal whether participants were set-up to be successful as
a result of participating in the training. The author will also reflect upon the study
and suggest changes that can be made for upcoming similar studies.
As detailed in Chapter Two, there are six conclusions the researcher can
make regarding effective professional development. These six are:
• Effective professional development is sustained and intensive rather than
short, learning opportunities (Garet et al., 2001).

93
• Workshops that focus on the implementation of research-based
instructional practices, involve active-learning experiences for
participants, and provide teachers with opportunities to adapt the
practices to their own classroom settings works (Guskey & Yoon, 2009).
• Outside experts who constitute program authors or researchers who
present ideas directly to teachers and then help to facilitate
implementation is also effective (Guskey & Yoon, 2009).
• Effective professional development requires extensive time that is well
organized, structured, purposefully directed and focused on content,
pedagogy, or both (Quick, Holtzman, & Chaney, 2009; Shulman, 1986).
• Teachers need time to practice their new skills or strategies with
structured and sustained follow-up for support and guidance (Quick,
Holtzman, & Chaney, 2009).
• The most effective professional development comes from careful
adaptation of practices to specific content, process and context elements
(National Staff Development Council, 2001).
Data for this study were collected using a mixed methods approach.
Participants in the professional development workshop were asked to complete three
surveys: pre-test (given prior to the training), post-test 1 (given immediately after
the training), and post-test 2 (given one month after the conclusion of the training).
There was one interview conducted for this research study. The author interviewed
Trainer 1, who also developed the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse

94
Learners training program. The purpose of the interview was to understand the
development of the training, the history of the training, structure of the training,
follow-up, results of this particular professional development program, and to see
how it aligned with the six conclusions of effective professional development.
This next section will detail the implications for practice and research. It will
also link these discoveries with the literature that was covered in the previous
chapters.
Implications for Practice
From the literature reviewed in Chapter Two, effective, quality professional
development contains certain features, as deduced from the six conclusions of
professional development, and is anchored in adult learning principles. The
professional development program used for this study took into account adult
learning when developing the program and also contains elements of the six effective
conclusions of effective professional development. The design of this particular
professional development opportunity was instrumental in setting up participants for
success.
The interview that was conducted for this study revealed information about
the design of the workshop. Trainer 1 reported that adult learning theories and ideas
of what she felt were effective in professional development, were considered during
the development of the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners
training. The participants in the training showed a statistically significant gain in
knowledge. One of the main factors that could have contributed to the gain in

95
knowledge is the fact that this particular professional development workshop was
grounded in adult learning principles and contained factors essential to conducting a
quality professional development opportunity. The interview with Trainer 1 revealed
that many of the six conclusions of effective professional development were
followed. For example, this training was not a “one shot” workshop opportunity; the
training was based on research, which was shared with all participants prior to the
workshop; the training involved active learning experiences; and the time spent in
the workshop was well organized, structured, and purposefully directed and focused
on pedagogy.
Also significant to evaluate effective professional development, is whether or
not the training is imbedded with adult learning principles. According to Trainer 1,
when developing the training, the researchers and authors Joyce and Showers were
followed. Trainer 1 stated that one of the most critical components to the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training is the follow-up and
coaching to help with implementation. Although coaching by the trainers are not
required for schools to have after the training is complete, the trainers stress to the
administrators the importance of follow-up and coaching to help with the transfer of
the new skills on their campus whether the coaching is done by them, the school’s
own instructional coaches, or administrators. Coaching gives the support,
encouragement, and expertise for teachers to practice their new skills. As mentioned
in Chapter Two, Knowles’ adult learning theory encourages practice with coaching

96
to ensure transfer and help with the implementation of newly acquired knowledge
and skills (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005).
One of the main considerations for this professional development was the
timing of the training. For example, the four-day training consisted of day 1 and 2
with a 2-week break in between and then days 3 and 4. Trainer 1 states:
We like to give the training over a period of time and not all at once because
this allows for the teachers to practice what they learn from the training to
their classroom and come back to us with questions or concerns about
implementation. (Trainer 1, personal communication, August 1, 2011)

Participants are also given time within the training to practice the new skills they
have learned with others in the workshop as the trainers are observing them. This
allows time for practice within the training with immediate feedback from the
facilitators. The efficacy increase is important to note because future facilitators and
developers of professional development programs should also consider timing when
constructing workshops. The increase in efficacy participants experienced in this
particular program supports the argument that professional development workshops
should not be a “one shot” deal.
As outlined in Chapter Three, the Building Foundation Reading Skills for
Diverse Learners training focuses on teaching the three of five parts of basic reading
skills: phonemic awareness, alphabetic understanding, and fluency. The trainers
take their time outlining for the participants what specific skill is covered and the
strategies for each big idea during the training time. Trainer 1 stated that it would
take too much time to cover all five components of reading skills thoroughly, so they

97
focus on the critical three to give ample time to participants for learning and practice.
Equally important, the trainers present to the participants the research behind their
strategies and how it links to their own classrooms. Knowles states that it is crucial
for adult learners to know why they need to learn something and how it is relevant to
them (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005).
Data showed that there was a statistically significant difference between what
participants knew before the training, right after the training, and one month
following the training. Participants had an increase of knowledge immediately after
the training and retained that knowledge one month after the training. A major goal
of professional development programs is to increase teachers’ knowledge base and
skill set. There is no point in participating in a professional development program if
there is no learning and retention of that learning, taking place, unless the purpose of
the program is purely a social one. The data showed that participants did in fact
learn and retain what they learned.
The data was critical in showing other findings that were equally important to
this study. Teacher motivation, efficacy, and a discrepancy in needs and follow-up
were revealed. As outlined in Chapter Two, motivation, efficacy, and need are
important factors to consider in the evaluation of the entire professional development
training opportunity and the effects it had on teachers and students.
The majority of the respondents reported that this training was highly aligned
with their personal, school, and state goals. There was no statistical significant
difference in participants’ perception of alignment before and after the training;

98
alignment remained high. This is important to know because when participants’
goals are aligned with professional development goals, it creates a conducive
learning environment. Knowles states that one of the six assumptions of the
andragogy model is the adults’ readiness to learn. In order for the adult to learn, the
learning experience must align with his/her developmental tasks thus far in their
lives (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1998). The response of the participants, clearly
show that participating in this training was part of their own plan as well.
Another important insight from this finding is the andragogical assumption of
motivation. An adults’ primary motivator to learn is from their own internal desires
rather than from external rewards (Knowles, 1984). This question implies that if the
training aligns with the participants’ own goals, they will be motivated to learn. We
can infer from these results that a motivated group of individuals were part of the
training.
Furthermore, Kirkpatrick’s level 1 of evaluation, reaction is considered. As
mentioned earlier, this first level of evaluation serves a critical purpose in the entire
evaluation process. Kirkpatrick (2004) concludes that this level of participants’
motivation and attention is important to the success of professional development and
implementation. Participants who are excited to learn the material being taught in
the professional development training, are more likely to pay attention, want to try
the new skills and strategies, and feel satisfied with the training. If, after
participating in the training, alignment to goal scores went down then that would also

99
indicate dissatisfaction with the training. Due to the fact that there was no decrease
in alignment, indicates educators’ overall satisfaction with the training.
Data also revealed the relationship between participation in the Building
Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training and self-reported teacher
efficacy. The findings showed a positive statistical difference from pre-test scores to
post-test 1 and post-test 2 scores for overall teacher efficacy and for the Instructional
Strategies efficacy subscale.
The increase of reported efficacy is meaningful because, as the research in
Chapter Two discussed, higher teacher efficacy can play a role in helping students
achieve. Haverback and Parault (2008) concluded that a teacher’s personal self-
efficacy regarding their ability to motivate their students and encourage learning had
a positive effect in the classroom they create and on student achievement. With the
training teachers received in this study, teachers felt stronger about their ability in
instructional strategies. This particular training is specific to teaching participants
new skills and strategies in teaching reading to students so an increase in efficacy
about the use of instructional strategies makes sense.
While an increase in efficacy occurred in this study, sometimes when
implementing a new skill or strategy, it is common for efficacy to decrease because it
can be difficult implementing something new (Guskey, 2000); however, in this
study, participants did not experience a decrease in efficacy. There are two possible
explanations. The first is that teachers who reported back were comfortable enough
with the strategies they learned and the practice given within the training was enough

100
for them to be able to successfully implement what they learned in their classrooms.
The second explanation could be that there was enough time from the start of the
school year to the post-test 2 survey that teachers were more settled, got to know
their students better, and felt more confident about their instructional strategies and
overall sense of efficacy.
The reported increase on a teachers’ total efficacy score is significant to note.
Shidler (2009) states that sustaining change in efficacy beliefs of teachers is one of
the biggest challenges of professional development opportunities. Anchoring the
training in adult learning theory is a way to overcome this challenge (Shidler, 2009;
Joyce & Showers, 1981). In the interview, Trainer 1 did state that adult learning
theories were taken into account when developing the training. Therefore, the
increase of total efficacy is evidence that the professional development opportunity
provided for the way adults learn and supports the conclusion of anchoring effective,
quality professional development in adult learning theories. By evaluating teachers’
sense of self-efficacy strengthens the positive relationship of this particular
professional development opportunity.
Teacher efficacy also targets Kirkpatrick’s Level 1 of reaction. Generally,
teachers experienced an increase in self-efficacy after participating in the training
providing for a positive reaction and relationship to their experience with the
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training program.
An interesting finding from the data was the type of support participants
needed and expected, following the training, to implement their new skills and

101
knowledge and also to report back what type of support was actually received.
These findings begin to aim at Kirkpatrick’s Level 3, behavior or transfer.
The majority of participants said they needed coaching, either by the trainers
or instructional coaches, in their classroom to follow-up with feedback, but when
respondents were asked what supports they expected, majority of them responded
that they expected nothing to happen. This discovery is especially alarming.
Teachers want support, however, they have come to expect that they will not receive
any support. Teachers have become accustomed to attending professional
development opportunities and not receiving any support or follow-up to help them
with what they have learned from these trainings. A culture shift needs to occur. If
schools are expected to produce high achieving students and teachers are expected to
keep up with their learning, then administrators need to start listening to what the
teachers say they need to help with applying their new knowledge and skills and
actually provide for their teachers.
As the data showed, participants wanted coaching, did not expect any
coaching, and actually only 3 of the 14 teachers who reported back on the post-test 2
survey, received any coaching. Respondents were also asked how important various
supports are to them. These same 14 respondents then rated coaching, feedback,
collegial support, and follow-up by trainers. Ten of 14 participants rated coaching,
feedback, collegial support, and follow-up by trainers as important and over 12 of 14
rated administrative support and peer mentoring as important. Results further
indicated that what teachers expected paralleled what actually occurred on campus.

102
Over 11 of the respondents did not receive any type of coaching or follow-up after
the training on their campus.
From the literature reviewed, coaching can help with the transfer of skills and
knowledge from the professional development training to the classroom. The coach
can help the learner determine when to use the skills and how to modulate them to
their students; basically offering support and guidance (Joyce & Showers, 1981).
Contrary to the literature, teachers from this training reported on the post-test 2 that
they were able to implement what they learned in the training to their classrooms and
saw a difference in various groups of students including special education, general
education, English Language Learners, and poverty students. For this particular
sample, coaching at the schools, following the training, was not the main reason for
implementation of what was learned. However, the results from this question did not
rule coaching out as an effective tool to help with implementation because the data
collected for this question relies upon self reports and not on observations or
students’ test scores. As we know from adult learning theory, if adults can find value
in what they learn and it is applicable to their real-life situations, learning can take
place (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). Eleven of 14 respondents found the
objectives and implementation of the professional development objectives as
valuable. This fact may be the reason why for the high success rate of
implementation reported back. Another contributing factor that may relate to the
high rate of implementation is that coaching was built into the professional
development program. Participants were given time within the training to observe

103
and practice with each other the new skills and strategies. There was also time
between sessions to go back and practice what was learned within their own
classrooms and report back to the trainers for troubleshooting, guidance, and advice.
These findings begin to scratch the surface into Kirkpatrick’s Level 3 of
transfer or behavior and links with andragogical principles. The fourth andragogical
principle emphasizes giving learners the freedom to discover things for themselves
while also providing guidance (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2005). The purpose
of these questions on the survey was to understand the type of supports participants
value or need and what they think they experience in their work environment to
identify any possible gap. The data showed there was a gap between what
participants wanted and what they said they experienced. Interestingly, although
implementation of the skills learned from the professional development were
reported on the high side, despite the lack of coaching, if more participants received
coaching there may have been an increase in implementation and confidence in
implementation that was self-reported by participants. Administrators at the
participating schools need to know about the gap that exists between the supports
teachers want and what teachers are reporting they are receiving. The culture of
teachers not expecting the support they need to facilitate their own learning needs to
change. Guskey (2000) states that change does not occur without professional
development; however, if teachers attend professional development but do not
receive the support necessary to implement what they learned, ultimately change will
not happen.

104
The relationship between the effectiveness of the coach and the ability to
transfer skills learned to the classroom was also examined. The majority of the
respondents felt that they needed more coaching. Those few teachers who did
receive coaching felt that their coach helped with the vertical transfer of skills and
knowledge learned from the professional development. Two of the three teachers
felt that the most important aspect to coaching was the immediate and specific
feedback regarding implementation.
These discoveries link to the research on coaching. Skill acquisition is the
key outcome for coaching (Joyce & Showers, 1981). In order for there to be skill
acquisition, practice should occur because without practice a skill will eventually
atrophy (Wong & Wong, 2008; Joyce & Showers, 1981). The majority of the
responses can be summed up by one of the respondents, “I feel that having the
support/coaching, just to touch base between or after training would have been
valuable. We learned a lot and walked away with a lot, but majority of the problem
comes when it is time to implement.” Respondents also reported that although they
were implementing the strategies they learned, they were not sure if they were doing
them correctly and having a coach would be valuable for a clearer understanding as
it relates to their individual classrooms.
These responses bring up an important point to consider. Teachers reported a
high level of efficacy and confidence with implementation of the skills they learned
from the training; however, teachers also reported they were not sure if they were
implementing what they learned correctly. There is a discrepancy between teachers’

105
efficacy scores and what they reported they were actually doing. Should the efficacy
and confidence scores that was self-reported by the teachers not be trusted?
Kirkpatrick (2004) concludes the most conclusive way to evaluate whether or not
implementation of skills are actually being done is through observation and/or by
students’ test scores. Therefore, in order to definitively know if implementation of
the skills actually took place would be to conduct observations of the teachers who
participated in the study and also compare their students’ test scores before and after
the training.
From the interview with Trainer 1, it was revealed that one particular school
hired Trainer 1 to follow-up, coach, and provide support for the teachers after
participating in the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners
training. This school, prior to the training, was a school that was marked as in
danger of being restructured because it did not meet proficiency levels in reading.
After the teachers participated in the training, received coaching, and implemented
what they learned, the results as reported by the school, increased. The students at
the school raised their reading scores over two years and the school was no longer in
danger of being restructured.
Less than half of the participants in the training actually completed the post-
test 2 survey, which gathered data for this question. However, the discovery from
this question begs a further investigation into the role coaches play in support for
teachers, the frequency of that support, and help with implementation.

106
Kirkpatrick Level 4 — Overall Effectiveness
The ability to show results from the professional development activity is
important for all stakeholders. Ultimately, the goal is higher student achievement.
Although teachers from the study reported that after the training they felt more
efficacious in instructional strategies and overall efficacy, and also felt confident in
their implementation abilities, the actual effect of student performance was not
measured. It is important to measure performance because the main purpose of
professional development training is to improve results by having the learners
acquire new skills and knowledge and apply them to their workplace for the purpose
of improving outcomes — in this case, their students’ learning (Kirkpatrick, 1994).
In Knowles’ theory, transfer of knowledge or skill is a main principle of andragogy,
but he also makes a case for support of the learner as well. Coaching can be that
support.
From the interview and data collected, it is easy to see that there is alignment
of the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners training with the six
conclusions of effective professional development and also with adult learning
principles. Participants in this particular training appear to have the best foundation
for a successful professional development experience.
The only critique to the training is to mandate for coaching and follow-up or
build it into part of the follow-up for the training, rather than just recommend it and
expect the schools to follow-up or provide the coaching on their own.

107
Implications for Research
This study was specific in looking at the vertical transfer of knowledge and
skills gained from the professional development training to the classroom and even
more precisely, the element of coaching in aiding with that transfer. There are
several suggestions for strengthening the study.
First, a small sample size hindered the strength of the data collected.
Statistically significant differences were still noted, however a greater sample size
would intensify that significance. Out of the 50 participants in the training, 46
participants responded to the pre-test, only 30 to the post-test 1 and just 14 to the
post-test 2. The high response rate on the pre-test and post-test 1 was due to the
personal hand-delivery of the surveys. To get a better response on the post-test 2
surveys, the researcher should visit each school and hand-deliver the survey rather
than requesting participation in the follow-up survey on-line. The on-line delivery
diminished the personal connection the researcher had with the subjects. This
disconnect between the researcher and participants made it easier for respondents to
not participate in the survey. There was no way for the researcher to know who
actually participated in the follow-up survey on-line, whereas when the researcher
was physically handing out the surveys, it was clear who filled out the survey and
who did not. Another reason for the low response rate was that participants could
not remember their identification number that allowed the author to link responses.
Multiple numbers were put on post-test 1 and post-test 2 surveys that were different
from what was recorded on pre-tests. The author should have stressed the

108
importance of having participants write this identifying code down so they would be
able to remember it or specifically state which phone number (cell phone vs. home
phone) to use as an identifier.
It would also be important to strengthen the knowledge portion of the study.
There was only one knowledge question on the surveys and having more specific
questions would bolster the statistical significance of the finding that participation in
the training increased the participants’ knowledge and skillset.
A meaningful area that would improve the results is implementation. This
study relied on self-reporting. Who actually knows if what the teacher was doing in
the classroom was actually what they learned from the training? We can hope that
the responses are honest and truthful, but actually observing implementation would
be ideal and yield a more unbiased report.
In order to strengthen and solidify the coaching and transfer aspect of this
study, a more in-depth investigation should follow. Actually meeting the
instructional coaches or persons of support at each school and interviewing them
would be a start. The interview can shed light on the type of coaching they are
doing, the frequency of the coaching, the type of feedback the coaches give, and
results of the coaching. Then, an observation of the coaching can further solidify or
negate what the interview reveals. Finally, interviewing the teacher who received
the coaching would disclose if teachers felt the coaching they received was valuable,
the most helpful aspects about the coaching, if frequency of the coaching was
sufficient or not, if feedback was helpful, and talk about the overall benefit or

109
hindrance of coaching. This data would be critical to further the study on
professional development and implementation because if schools are spending a lot
of money on professional development and not seeing results, an issue of learning
and implementation may be to blame. Coaching, as the literature shows, is a way to
help embed and sustain change because with more practice and support, transfer of
skills and knowledge will take place.
Finally, as a way to evaluate whether or not the professional development
actually “works” would be to allow time for implementation of new skills to the
classroom, then test the students to see if there is a change in achievement. With
respect to this particular training, reading scores would be analyzed. After all, the
point of going to a professional development training is to improve results by having
educators learn new skills and apply the new knowledge to their classrooms. As
mentioned earlier, Trainer 1 reported a school on Maui who took part in the same
training and hired Trainer 1 for follow-up and coaching. Tremendous gains in
reading scores at this school occurred because of the successful implementation of
the skills, knowledge, and strategies learned from the Building Foundation Reading
Skills for Diverse Learners training. Without the support and coaching the teachers
received, it is doubtful whether the gains in reading would have happened.
Conclusion
This study contributed to what we know about professional development,
coaching, and transfer. It confirmed earlier studies and brought up some vital points
to investigate further as a follow-up to these findings.

110
When exploring professional development opportunities, it is crucial to
choose those that have adult learning principles as its foundation. This provides the
best environment of learning for those attending the professional development. The
Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse Learners used adult learning
principles as a base for their program, which may have contributed to the high report
of learning, implementation, and teacher efficacy.
Second, coaching is an important strategy for helping to ensure transfer of
new knowledge and skills. Participants reported a high need for coaching. Those
that did receive coaching valued its support and those that didn’t receive coaching
wished they had. Additionally investigating the frequency of coaching and the type
of feedback the coaches are giving will advance this area of need. Schools will be
able to see the value of the role of the coach and hopefully give this type of support
to their teachers.
Third, a longer study would be necessary to look at student achievement
gains. Better student performance and higher student achievement is the ultimate
end result of professional development. It would be necessary to examine student
scores to see if there was a significant difference before the training and after
implementation of what was learned at the training. Higher student scores would
indicate a positive outcome of the professional development training program.
This study’s purpose was only partially fulfilled. It discovered that when
instructional coaches or persons of support at the school exist, correct
implementation of new knowledge and skills are more likely to occur successfully.

111
The teachers valued their persons of support for the feedback and being able to
troubleshoot in their own classroom. Results of this study will be shared with the
schools that participated because it is necessary for the schools to understand the
importance of follow-up and support for their teachers after going through a
professional development program. Hopefully these findings will help schools give
teachers the support they need and eventually get our students to achieve at their
highest potential.

112
REFERENCES
Allinder, R.M. (1995). An examination of the relationship between teacher efficacy
and curriculum-based measurement and student achievement. Remedial and
special education, 16(4), 247-254.

Ball, D., & Cohen, D. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward
a practice-based theory of professional education. Teaching as the learning
profession: Handbook of policy and practice, 1, 3–22.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological review, 84(2), 191-215.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H.
Freeman and Company.

Belenky, M., & Stanton, A. (2000). Inequality, development, and connected
knowing. Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in
progress, 71-102.

Blank, R., De las Alas, N., & Smith, C. (2008). Does teacher professional
development have effects on teaching and learning?: Analysis of evaluation
findings from programs for mathematics and science teachers in 14 states.
Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the
terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3.

Brookfield, S. (1984). Self-directed adult learning: A critical paradigm. Adult
education quarterly, 35(3), 59.71.

Brookfield, S. (1983a). Adult learners, adult education, and community. Milton
Keynes, England: Open University Press.

Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey -Bass.

Capara, G.V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Steca, P. (2003). Efficacy beliefs as
determinants of teacher’s job satisfaction. Journal of education psychology,
95(4), 821-832.

113
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Steca, P., & Malone, P. S. (2006). Teachers' self-
efficacy beliefs as determinants of job satisfaction and students' academic
achievement: A study at the school level. Journal of School Psychology,
44(6), 473-490.

Chard, D.J. (2004). Toward a science of professional development in early reading
instruction. Exceptionality, 12(3), 175-191.

Chickering, A. and Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Clark, R.E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting
the right performance solutions. USA: Information Age Publishing.

Collins, J.L. (1982). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, New York.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003).
Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie
(Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp.
209-240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of
state policy evidence: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy,
University of Washington Seattle, WA.

Davenport, J., & Davenport, J. (1985). A chronology and analysis of the andragogy
debate. Adult education quarterly, 35(3), 152-159.

DeForest, P. A., & Hughes, J. N. (1992). The effect of teacher involvement and
teacher self-efficacy on ratings of consultant effectiveness and intervention
acceptability. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 3(4),
301-316.

Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers' sense of efficacy: An important factor
in school improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 173-184.

114
Desimone, L., Porter, A., Garet, M., Yoon, K., & Birman, B. (2002). Effects of
professional development on teachers' instruction: Results from a three-year
longitudinal study. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 24(2), 81-
112.

Easton, L.B. (2008). From professional development to professional learning. Phi
Delta Kappan, 89(10), 755-761.

Elmore, R.F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The
imperative for professional development in education. Washington DC:
Albert Shanker Institute.

Eriksen, K. (2008). “Interpersonal” clients, students, and supervisees: Translating
robert kegan. American counseling association, 47, 233-248.

Fritz, J.J., Miller-Heyl, J., Kreutzer, J.C., & MacPhee, D. (1995). Fostering personal
teaching efficacy through staff development and classroom activities. The
journal of educational research, 88, 200-208.

Garet, M., Birman, B., Porter, A., Desimone, L., & Herman, R. (1999). Designing
Effective Professional Development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program
[and] Technical Appendices.

Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of
teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

Gersten, R., Chard, D., & Baker, S. (2000). Factors enhancing sustained use of
research-based instructional practices. Journal of learning disabilities, 5,
445-457.

Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation.
Journal of educational psychology, 76(4), 569-582.

Gilbert, T.E. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance. New
York: McGraw-Hill.

Gill, J., Kostiw, N., & Stone, S. (2010). Coaching teachers in effective instruction: A
victorian perspective. Literacy learning: the middle years, 18(2), 49-53.

Grabinski, C. (2005). Environments for development. New directions for adult and
continuing education, 108, 79-89.

115
Graczewski, C., Knudson, J., & Holtzman, D.J. (2009). Instructional leadership in
practice: What does it look like, and what influence does it have? Journal of
education for students placed at risk, 14, 72-96.

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual
framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational evaluation and
policy analysis, 11(3), 255.

Guskey, T. R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the
implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and teacher education,
4(1), 63-69.

Guskey, T. R. (1994). Professional Development in Education: In Search of the
Optimal Mix. Paper presented at the AERA.

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.

Guskey, T. R. (2003). Analyzing lists of the characteristics of effective professional
development to promote visionary leadership. NASSP Bulletin, 87(637), 4.

Guskey, T. R. (2009). Closing the Knowledge Gap on Effective Professional
Development. Educational Horizons, 224-233.

Guskey, T.R., & Yoon, K.S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi
Delta Kappan, 90(7), 495-500.

Hall, L., & McKeen, R.L. (1989). Increased professionalism in the work
environment of teachers through peer coaching, Education, 109(3), 310-317.

Haverback, H.R., & Parault, S.J. (2008). Pre-service reading teacher efficacy and
tutoring: A review. Educational psychological review, 20, 237-255.

Hawaii Department of Education (2010). Highly qualified teacher, HOUSSE
reference guide. Retrived from
http://hqt.k12.hi.us/STATE/OHR/TeacherQuality.nsf/5cd7399be90745468a2
56c2c006ee384/f5fd554590f8ce6e0a2577270070fb00/$FILE/2010-
11%20HQT%20PHB%202

Hedges, L.V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando:
Academic Press.

116
Hill, H. (2007). Learning in the teaching workforce. The Future of Children, 17(1),
111-127.

Hill, H. (2009). Fixing teacher professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(7),
470-476.

Hughes, C. (1999). The dire in self-directed learning. Adults learning, 11(2), 7-9.

Ingalls, J. D., & Arceri, J. M. (1972). A Trainers Guide To Andragogy, Its Concepts,
Experience and Application.

Joyce, B.R., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving inservice training: The message of
research. Educational leadership, 37, 379-385.

Joyce, B.R., & Showers, B. (1981). Transfer of training: The contribution of
“coaching.” Journal of education, 163(2), 163-172.

Joyce, B.R., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational
leadership, 40(1), 4-8.

Joyce, B.R., & Showers, B. (1987). Low cost arrangements for peer coaching.
Journal of staff development, 8(1), 22-28.

Joyce, B.R., & Showers, B. (1988). Student achievement through staff development.
New York: Longman.

Joyce, B.R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Kegan, R. (1980). Making meaning: The constructive-developmental approach to
persons and practice. The personnel and guidance journal, 373-380.

Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kegan, R. (1994). In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kerka, S. (2003). Does adult educator professional development make a difference?
Myths and realities (ERIC). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC:
Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

Kirkpatrick, D. (1994). Evaluating training programs. San Francisco: Berrett-
Koehler Publishers, Inc.

117
Kirkpatrick, D. (2001). The Four Level Evaluation Process. (handout).

Kirkpatrick, D. (2006). Seven keys to unlock the four levels of evaluation.
Performance Improvement, 45(7), 5-8.

Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2007). Implementing the four levels.

Knowles, M. S. (1978). Andragogy: Adult learning theory in perspective.
Community College Review, 5(3), 9-20.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The Adult Learner: The
Definitive Classic in Adult Education and Human Resource Development.
(5th ed.). Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The
definitive classic in adult education and human resource development.

Kutner, M., Sherman, R., Tibbets, J., & Condelli, L. (1997). Evaluating professional
development: A framework for adult education. Washington, DC: Pelavin
Research Institute.

L’Allier, S., Elish-Piper, L. (2007). Ten best practices for professional development
in reading. Illinois reading council journal, 35(1), 22-27.

L’Allier, S., Elish-Piper, L., & Bean, R.M. (2010). What matters for elementary
literacy coaching? Guiding principles for instrucitonal improvement and
student achievement. The reading teacher, 63(7), 544-554.

Lewis, L., Parsad, B., Carey, N., Bartfai, N., Farris, E., Smerdon, B., et al. (1999).
Teacher quality: A report on the preparation and qualifications of public
school teachers (NCES 1999-080). US Department of Education.
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions,
and emerging confluences. Handbook of qualitative research, 2, 163-188.

Love, P. and Guthrie, V. (1999). Kegan’s order of consciousness. From ASHE
Reader. Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing.

Meijer, C. J. W., & Foster, S. F. (1988). The effect of teacher self-efficacy on
referral chance. The Journal of Special Education, 22(3), 378.

118
Merriam, S. (2001). Andragogy and self-directed learning: Pillars of adult learning
theory. New directions for adult and continuing education, 2001(89), 3.

Merriam, S.B. (2004). The role of cognitive development in Mezirow’s
transformational learning theory. Adult education quarterly, 55(1), 60.

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in
Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.

Mertens, D. M. (2003). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The
transformative-emancipatory perspective. Handbook of mixed methods in
social and behavioral research, 135–164.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation
theory. Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in
progress, 3-33.

Mezirow, J. (2003). Transformative learning as discourse. Journal of transformative
education, 1(1), 3-33.

Milligan, F. (1995). In defence of andragogy. Nurse education today, 15, 22.

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2000). The nation’s report card.
Washington, DC: Author.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub L. No. 107-110 C.F.R. (2001).

Parsad, B., Lewis, L., Farris, E., & Greene, B. (2001). Teacher preparation and
professional development. National Center for Educational Center for
Education Statistics. Washington DC (NCES: 2001-088).

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.

Penuel, W., Fishman, B., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. (2007). What makes
professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum
implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921.

119
Plourde, L. (2002). The influence of student teaching on preservice elementary
teachers science self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs. Journal of
instructional psychology, 29, 245-254.

Podell, D., & Soodak, L. (1993). Teacher efficacy and bias in special education
referrals. The journal of education research, 86, 247-253.

Quick, H.E., Holtzman, D.J., & Chaney, K.R. (2009). Professional development and
instructional practice: Conceptions and evidence of effectiveness. Journal of
education for students placed at risk, 14, 45-71.

Reeves, D.B. (2007). Coaching myths and realities. Educational leadership, 65(2),
89-90.

Relich, J.D., Debus, R.L., & Walker, R. (1986). The mediating role of attribution and
self-efficacy variables for treatment effects on achievement outcomes.
Contemporary eduational psychology, 11, 195-216.

Ross, J., & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy:
Results of a randomized field trial. The journal of educational research,
101(1), 50-60.

Salkind, N.J. (2011). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics 4
th
ed.
Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage Publications.

Saphier, J., & West, L. (2009). How coaches can maximize student learning. Phi
Delta Kappan, 91(4), 46-50.

Sawchuck, S., & Keller, B. (2010). Professional development at a crossroads.
Education week, 30(11), 2-4.

Schunk, D.H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational
psychologist, 26, 207-231.

Schunk, D.H., & Gunn, T.P. (1986). Self-efficacy and skill development: Influence
of task strategies and attributions. Journal of educational research, 79, 238-
244.

Schwarzer, R., & Hallum, S. (2008). Perceived teacher self-efficacy as a predictor of
job stress and burnout: Mediation analyses. Applied psychology: an
international review, 57, 152-171.

120
Seaton, M., Emmett, R.E., Welsh, K., & Petrossian, A. (2008). Teaming up for
teaching and learning. Leadership, 37(3), 26-29.

Sherman, S., & Freas, A. (2004). The wild west of executive coaching. Harvard
business review, 82-90.

Shidler, L. (2009). The impact of time spent coaching for teacher efficacy on student
achievement. Early childhood education, 36, 453-460.

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.
Harvard educational review, 57, 1-22.

Skaalvik, E., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and
relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher
burnout. Journal of educational psychology, 99(3), 611-625.

Sparks, G.M. (1988). Teachers’ attitudes toward change and subsequent
improvements in classroom teaching. Journal of educational psychology,
80(1), 111-117.

Sparks, G.M., & Bruder, S. (1987). Before and after peer coaching. Educational
leadership, 45(3), 54-57.

Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (2000). Strengthening professional development. Education
week, 37, 42-44.

Spillane, J.P. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers efforts to reconstruct
their practice: the mediating role of teachers zones of enactment. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 143-175.

Spillane, J.P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J.B. (2001). Investigating school
leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational researcher, 30(3),
23-28.

Stipek, D.J. (1993). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice, 2
nd
edition.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, A Division of Simon & Schuster,
Inc.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998) Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative
and quantitative approaches. Vol. 46. Applied Social Research Methods
Series. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

121
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social &
behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Taylor, E. (2000). Analyzing research on transformative learning theory. Learning as
transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, 285-328.

Taylor, E. (2001). Transformative learning theory: A neurobiological perspective of
the role of emotions and unconscious ways of knowing. International journal
of lifelong education, 20(3), 218-236.

Taylor, E. (2007). An update of transformative learning theory: A critical review of
the empirical research (1999-2005). International journal of lifelong
education, 26(2), 173-191.

Taylor, K. and Marienau, C. (1997). Constructive-development theory as a
framework for assessment in higher education. Assessment and evaluation in
higher education, 22(2), 233-247.

Tinberg, H. and Weisberger, R. (1998). In over our heads: Applying kegan’s theory
of development to community college students. Community college review,
26(2), 43-56.

Tough, A.M. (1966). The assistance obtained by adult self-teachers. Adult education
quarterly, 17(30), 30-37.

Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an
elusive construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783-805.

Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy:
Its meaning and measure. Review of educational research, 68(2), 202.

Whitehurst, G.J. (2002). Research on teacher preparation and professional
development. Paper presented at the White House Conference on Preparing
Tomorrow’s Teachers, Washington, DC.

Wilson, S., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional
knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional
development. Review of research in education, 24, 173-209.

Wohlstetter, P., Datnow, A., & Park, V. (2008). Creating a system for data-driven
decision-making: applying the principal-agent framework. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19(3), 239-259.

122
Wolters, C.A., & Daugherty, S.G. (2007). Goal structures and teachers’ sense of
efficacy: Their relation and association to teaching experience and academic
level. Journal of educational psychology, 99(1), 181-193.

Wong, H., & Wong, R. (2008). Academic coaching produces more effective
teachers. Education digest, 74(1), 59-64.

Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers' sense of efficacy and
beliefs about control. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 81.

Yoon, K., Duncan, T., Lee, S., Scarloss, B., & Shapley, K. (2007). Reviewing the
evidence on how teacher professional development affects student
achievement (Issues & Answers Report, REL 2007–No. 033). Washington,
DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional
Educational Laboratory Southwest. Retrieved from
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs, 10(9).

Zimmerman, J.A., & May, J.J. (2003). Providing effective professional development:
What’s holding us back? American secondary education, 31(2), 37-48.

123
APPENDIX A
PRE-TEST SURVEY
1. Introduction and Welcome

Research suggests that effective professional development is a key piece in providing
teachers with the tools and strategies for improving outcomes for students. We are
interested in learning more about your experience with the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners Training. We appreciate hearing your views.

Your responses are anonymous and there is no way for the researchers to link your
identity to these responses. The information below may help us to understand how
teachers' perceptions may vary. Knowing more about your views and experience can
help strengthen training and resources for teachers on this very important and
difficult subject.

By completing this survey, you agree to be a participant. You may quit the survey at
any time or skip any question you do not wish to answer. Your participation is
voluntary.

Thank you for participating!

2. Participant ID Number

This information allows the researcher to link responses from survey to survey.
There is no way the researcher will be able to identify who you are.

1. Please write your birth month and last four digits of your home phone
number (MMPPPP). For example, if you were born in January and your last
four digits of your phone number is 6789, you would write 016789 as your
code.

_____________________________

124
3. Demographic Information

The following questions will ask for demographic information. Information about the
qualifications and experience of teachers can be used to better tailor professional
development opportunities.

1. What is your job title?

• Principal
• Vice Principal
• Teacher, Grade K
• Teacher, Grade 1
• Teacher, Grade 2
• Teacher, Grade 3
• Teacher, Grade 4-5
• Teacher, Special Education
• Teacher, ELL
• Teacher, Other _______________________ (specify)
• Curriculum Coordinator/Academic or Literary Coach
• Counselor

2. How long have you been in your current position?

_______________

3. How long have you been a teacher and/or educator?

_______________

4. What is your highest level of education?

• High School Diploma
• Some college
• AA/AS Degree
• Bachelor Degree
• Masters Degree
• Doctorate Degree

125
4. Content Knowledge of Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners training

1. To what extent do you believe the professional development activity is:

None at
All
To Some
Degree
Quite a
Bit Always
Consistent with your own goals for your
professional development?

Consistent with your school's or
department's goal to change practice?

Designed to support state or district
standards/curriculum frameworks?

Designed to support state or district
assessment?

2. Have you ever been to a Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners Training?

Yes _____ No ______

3. If yes, have you utilized the skills from the Building Foundation Reading
Skills for Diverse Learners in your classroom?

Yes _____ No ______

4. How much do you know about the Building Foundation Reading Skills for
Diverse Learners training?

• I know nothing at all
• I know a little
• I know some of the skills and knowledge from this training
• I know exactly what the trainers will be teaching me and can
implement the skills and knowledge from this training into my
classroom.

126

5. I can identify the five basic reading skills. They are:

___________________________________________________________

6. I know how the research on basic reading skills connects to my instructional
practice.

Yes _____ No ______

127
4. Teacher Beliefs

Directions: Please indicate your opinion about each of the questions below by
marking any one of the nine responses in the columns on the right side, ranging from
(1) “None at all” to (9) “A Great Deal” as each represents a degree on the continuum.
Please respond to each of the questions by considering the combination of your
current ability, resources, and opportunity to do each of the following in your present
position.

1- Nothing
2
3 - Very Little
4
5 – Some Influence
6
7 – Quite a Bit
8
9 - A Great Deal
1
How much can you do to control disruptive
behavior in the classroom?

2
How much can you do to motivate students
who show low interest in school work?

3
How much can you do to calm a student
who is disruptive or noisy?

4
How much can you do to help your students
value learning?

5
To what extent can you craft good questions
for your students?

6
How much can you do to get children to
follow classroom rules?

7
How much can you do to get students to
believe they can do well in school work?

8
How well can you establish a classroom
management system with each group of
students?

9
To what extent can you use a variety of
assessment strategies?

10
To what extent can you provide an
alternative explanation or example when
students are confused?

11
How much can you assist families in
helping their children do well in school?

12
How well can you implement alternative
teaching strategies in your classroom?

128
5. Thank You

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Your responses will help to
strengthen training and resources for teachers in the future.

129
APPENDIX B
POST-TEST 1 SURVEY
1. Introduction and Welcome

Research suggests that effective professional development is a key piece in providing
teachers with the tools and strategies for improving outcomes for students. We are
interested in learning more about your experience with the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners Training. We appreciate hearing your views.

Your responses are anonymous and there is no way for the researchers to link your
identity to these responses. The information below may help us to understand how
teachers' perceptions may vary. Knowing more about your views and experience can
help strengthen training and resources for teachers on this very important and
difficult subject.

By completing this survey, you agree to be a participant. You may quit the survey at
any time or skip any question you do not wish to answer. Your participation is
voluntary.

Thank you for participating!

2. Participant ID Number

This information allows the researcher to link responses from survey to survey.
There is no way the researcher will be able to identify who you are.

1. Please write your birth month and last four digits of your home phone
number (MMPPPP). For example, if you were born in January and your last
four digits of your phone number is 6789, you would write 016789 as your
code.

_____________________________

130
3. Content Knowledge of Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners training

Now that you have taken the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners training, please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

1. To what extent to you believe the professional development activity is:
None at
All
To Some
Degree
Quite a
Bit Always
Consistent with your own goals for your
professional development?

Consistent with your school's or
department's goal to change practice?

Designed to support state or district
standards/curriculum frameworks?

Designed to support state or district
assessment?

2. Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

Strongly
Disagree Disagree Agree
Strongly
Agree
The ideas and practices taught were
new to me.

The ideas and practices taught were
relevant to my professional practice.

The quality of information
presented was sound (e.g. reflecting
best practice).

The information was conveyed in an
effective manner.

I am likely to implement the ideas
and practices taught in my
professional setting.

If I implement the ideas and
practices taught my students are
likely to benefit.

131
3. I can identify the five basic reading components. They are:

______________________________________________________________

4. I know how the research on basic reading skills connects to my instructional
practice.

Yes _____ No ______

5. What do you need next in order to apply what you learned in your classroom?
Please check all that apply.

• More time to learn the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners program.
• More practice under simulated conditions, with feedback.
• Coaching, either by trainers or instructional coaches, in the classroom
with feedback.
• More research based evidence the Building Foundation Reading Skills for
Diverse Learners training is relevant to my teaching and classroom.

6. I expect the following support to occur after this training. Please check all
that apply.

• Nothing
• Follow-up/Coaching by the trainers
• Follow-up/Coaching by the instructional coaches at my school
• Follow-up/Coaching by my peers who also attended the training
• Follow-up/Coaching by my administration

132
7. How important to you are the following?
Not at
all
A little
important Important
Very
Important
Coaching
Feedback
Peer Mentoring
Administrative Support
Collegial Support
Follow-up training by
trainers

133
4. Teacher Beliefs

Directions: Please indicate your opinion about each of the questions below by
marking any one of the nine responses in the columns on the right side, ranging from
(1) “None at all” to (9) “A Great Deal” as each represents a degree on the continuum.
Please respond to each of the questions by considering the combination of your
current ability, resources, and opportunity to do each of the following in your present
position.

1- Nothing
2
3 - Very Little
4
5 – Some Influence
6
7 – Quite a Bit
8
9 - A Great Deal
1
How much can you do to control disruptive
behavior in the classroom?

2
How much can you do to motivate students
who show low interest in school work?

3
How much can you do to calm a student
who is disruptive or noisy?

4
How much can you do to help your students
value learning?

5
To what extent can you craft good questions
for your students?

6
How much can you do to get children to
follow classroom rules?

7
How much can you do to get students to
believe they can do well in school work?

8
How well can you establish a classroom
management system with each group of
students?

9
To what extent can you use a variety of
assessment strategies?

10
To what extent can you provide an
alternative explanation or example when
students are confused?

11
How much can you assist families in
helping their children do well in school?

12
How well can you implement alternative
teaching strategies in your classroom?

134
5. Thank You

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Your responses will help to
strengthen training and resources for teachers in the future.

135
APPENDIX C
POST-TEST 2 SURVEY
1. Introduction and Welcome

Research suggests that effective professional development is a key piece in providing
teachers with the tools and strategies for improving outcomes for students. We are
interested in learning more about your experience with the Building Foundation
Reading Skills for Diverse Learners Training. We appreciate hearing your views.

Your responses are anonymous and there is no way for the researchers to link your
identity to these responses. The information below may help us to understand how
teachers' perceptions may vary. Knowing more about your views and experience can
help strengthen training and resources for teachers on this very important and
difficult subject.

By completing this survey, you agree to be a participant. You may quit the survey at
any time or skip any question you do not wish to answer. Your participation is
voluntary.

Thank you for participating!

2. Participant ID Number

This information allows the researcher to link responses from survey to survey.
There is no way the researcher will be able to identify who you are.

1. Please write your birth month and last four digits of your home phone
number (MMPPPP). For example, if you were born in January and your last
four digits of your phone number is 6789, you would write 016789 as your
code.

_____________________________

136
3. Content Knowledge of Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners training

Now that you have taken the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners training, please answer the following questions to the best of your ability.

1. To what extent to you believe the professional development activity is:

None at
All
To Some
Degree
Quite a
Bit Always
Consistent with your own goals for your
professional development?

Consistent with your school's or
department's goal to change practice?

Designed to support state or district
standards/curriculum frameworks?

Designed to support state or district
assessment?

2. I can identify the five basic reading components. They are:

______________________________________________________________

3. I know how the research on basic reading skills connects to my instructional
practice.

Yes _____ No ______

137
4. Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

Strongly
Disagree Disagree Agree
Strongly
Agree
I have been able to implement major
objectives taught in a regular,
sustained fashion.

As a result of implementing objectives
of this professional development, I
have observed a positive impact on my
general education students.

As a result of implementing objectives
of this professional development, I
have observed a positive impact on my
special education students.

As a result of implementing objectives
of this professional development, I
have observed a positive impact on my
ELL students.

As a result of implementing objectives
of this professional development, I
have observed a positive impact on my
high poverty students.

I consider the changes in my teaching
and or student outcomes as a result of
implementing objectives of this
professional development as important
and valuable.

5. Did you receive support, either from peers, administration, or the trainers to
help implement the skills and knowledge learned from the Building
Foundation Reading Skills in Diverse Learners training?
Yes _____ No _____

138

6. If you answered “yes” to Question 5, how often did you receive
support/coaching and feedback?

• 1 time
• 2 times
• 3 times
• 4 times
• 5 times
• 6 or more times

7. Did you feel you received enough support/coaching?

Yes _____ No _____

8. If you answered “no” to Question 7, did you need more/less support/coaching
and why?

______________________________________________________________

9. If you received support/coaching for this professional development training,
how did it help or hinder your implementation of the skills and knowledge in
your classroom?

______________________________________________________________

10. If you received support/coaching for this professional development activity,
what was the most helpful about the support/coach? What was the least
helpful about the support/coach?

______________________________________________________________

139
11. Now that you have had the opportunity to implement the new skills and
knowledge from the Building Foundation Reading Skills for Diverse
Learners, how important to you are the following for implementation
purposes?

Not at
all
A little
important Important
Very
Important
Coaching
Feedback
Peer Mentoring
Administrative Support
Collegial Support
Follow-up training by
trainers

140
4. Teacher Beliefs

Directions: Please indicate your opinion about each of the questions below by
marking any one of the nine responses in the columns on the right side, ranging from
(1) “None at all” to (9) “A Great Deal” as each represents a degree on the continuum.
Please respond to each of the questions by considering the combination of your
current ability, resources, and opportunity to do each of the following in your present
position.

Please respond to each of the questions by considering a combination of your current
ability, resources, and opportunity to do each of the following in your present
position after receiving and implementing the Building Foundation Reading Skills
for Diverse Learners training.

1 Nothing
2
3 - Very Little
4
5 – Some Influence
6
7 – Quite a Bit
8
9 - A Great Deal
1
How much can you do to control disruptive
behavior in the classroom?

2
How much can you do to motivate students who
show low interest in school work?

3
How much can you do to calm a student who is
disruptive or noisy?

4
How much can you do to help your students value
learning?

5
To what extent can you craft good questions for
your students?

6
How much can you do to get children to follow
classroom rules?

7
How much can you do to get students to believe
they can do well in school work?

8
How well can you establish a classroom
management system with each group of students?

9
To what extent can you use a variety of assessment
strategies?

10
To what extent can you provide an alternative
explanation or example when students are
confused?

11
How much can you assist families in helping their
children do well in school?

12
How well can you implement alternative teaching
strategies in your classroom?

141
5. Thank You

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Your responses will help to
strengthen training and resources for teachers in the future.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The area of professional development, within the educational setting, is critical to on-going learning for teachers and ultimately, higher student achievement. The literature on professional development is vast

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A professional development program evaluation: teacher efficacy, learning, and transfer

PDF

Enhancing professional development aimed at changing teachers' perceptions of Micronesian students

PDF

Perception and use of instructional technology: teacher candidates as adopters of innovation

PDF

Teachers as bystanders: the effect of teachers’ perceptions on reporting bullying behavior

PDF

Professional development: a six-year data evaluation of HIDTA law enforecement task force training programs

PDF

Professional development for teaching online

PDF

The importance of teacher motivation in professional development: implementing culturally relevant pedagogy

PDF

Effects of individualized professional development on the theoretical understandings and instructional practices of teachers

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

Raising cultural self-efficacy among faculty and staff of a private native Hawaiian school system

PDF

Teacher perception of the implementation of the educator effectiveness system

PDF

How effective professional development in differentiated instruction can save Hawaii's Catholic schools

PDF

The effects of coaching on building and sustaining effective leadership practice of an urban school administrator

PDF

Developing 21st century skills through effective professional development: a study of Jamestown Polytechnic Charter School Organization

PDF

Examining principal perceptions, and teacher and school effectiveness through a value-added accountability model

PDF

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

PDF

Perceptions of Hawai`i TRIO Talent Search staff and target high school administrators of college access factors and project effectiveness

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development

PDF

The perceptions of faculty and administrators of remedial mathematics education in two higher education institutions

PDF

Effective professional development strategies to support the advancement of women into senior student affairs officer positions

Asset Metadata

Creator Nunokawa, Kari Mariye Luna (author)

Core Title Teacher perception on coaching and effective professional development implementation

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 03/23/2012

Defense Date 03/23/2012

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Coaching,evaluation,implementation,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,Reading,self-efficacy

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Sundt, Melora A. (committee chair), Brewer, Dominic J. (committee member), Cole, Darnell (committee member)

Creator Email kari.luna@gmail.com,karinunokawa@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c127-676377

Unique identifier UC1397128

Identifier usctheses-c127-676377 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-NunokawaKa-543.pdf

Dmrecord 676377

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Nunokawa, Kari Mariye Luna

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu