A teacher sits through a professional development session covering material she mastered years ago. Another dutifully collects course credits for salary advancement without learning anything useful. Another experiences genuinely transformative learning that changes her practice. Professional development (PD) is supposed to improve teaching practice—but the gap between PD as experienced and PD as intended often yawns wide, leaving teachers cynical about learning opportunities that could genuinely help.
The PD Landscape
Canadian teachers engage in professional development through various mechanisms. Board-mandated PD days provide training determined by administrative priorities. Self-directed PD allows teachers to pursue learning of their choice. Additional Qualification (AQ) courses in Ontario and similar programs elsewhere offer credential-bearing learning. Conferences, workshops, graduate study, and informal learning round out professional development options.
The time invested in professional development is substantial. Most provinces require or expect ongoing PD. Many collective agreements include PD provisions. Teachers pursuing salary advancement through additional credentials invest significant time beyond regular work. The PD investment—in time, resources, and opportunity cost—deserves attention to whether it produces value.
PD purposes vary. Some PD addresses system priorities—rolling out new curriculum, implementing new initiatives, developing mandated competencies. Some addresses teacher-identified needs—skills teachers want to develop, challenges they want to address. Some provides credentials that affect salary or advancement. These purposes don't always align.
What Research Says About Effective PD
Research on professional development effectiveness identifies characteristics of PD that actually improves practice. Effective PD is sustained over time rather than one-shot workshops. It focuses on specific content and practices rather than generic approaches. It involves active learning rather than passive listening. It includes opportunities to practice and receive feedback. It connects to teachers' actual work rather than abstract principles.
Most professional development doesn't have these characteristics. Single-day workshops predominate over sustained programs. Generic presentations reach all teachers regardless of relevance to their work. Passive attendance is more common than active engagement. Practice opportunities and feedback are rare. The gap between research-identified effectiveness and actual PD practice is substantial.
The lack of evidence for most PD interventions is striking. Despite enormous investment in professional development, evidence that specific PD activities improve teaching or student outcomes is limited. Much PD continues based on tradition, assumption, or mandate rather than demonstrated effectiveness.
The Credential Chase
Salary grids in many provinces advance with additional credentials. Teachers pursuing higher salaries take courses to accumulate credits. These credits may be in subject-area content, teaching methods, leadership, or other topics. The credential pursuit creates substantial market for PD providers—universities, professional organizations, and private companies offering courses.
Whether credential-bearing courses improve practice is questionable. Teachers may choose courses for convenience, cost, or ease rather than relevance. Courses may be passed without deep learning. Credits accumulate without practice changing. The assumption that more credentials mean better teaching may not hold—yet the salary grid incentivizes credential accumulation regardless of learning.
The credential emphasis can crowd out potentially more valuable learning. Time spent in courses for credits isn't spent on other professional development. The opportunity cost of credential pursuit—what teachers might learn instead—rarely enters calculations. The paper chase may displace learning that doesn't produce paper.
Mandated PD and Teacher Agency
System-mandated professional development addresses administrative priorities but may not address teacher needs. Teachers required to attend sessions on topics they've mastered or that don't apply to their teaching experience PD as compliance rather than learning. The same PD for all teachers assumes homogeneous needs that don't exist.
Teacher choice in professional development produces different dynamics. Teachers selecting their own learning pursue what interests and challenges them. Self-directed PD may be more engaging and more applied. But self-direction may also miss areas teachers don't recognize they need. The balance between mandated and chosen PD involves genuine tradeoffs.
Differentiated professional development would match PD to actual teacher needs. New teachers need different PD than veterans. Teachers facing particular challenges need targeted support. This differentiation requires assessment of teacher needs and provision of varied options—capacities many systems lack.
The PD Day Critique
Designated PD days—non-instructional days when teachers engage in professional development—receive particular criticism. From family perspectives, these days disrupt childcare and schedules. From effectiveness perspectives, workshop-style PD on these days often lacks characteristics of effective learning. The PD day may serve administrative convenience more than professional development.
Alternatives to PD days exist. Embedded professional development integrated into regular school time. Release time allowing teachers to observe colleagues or engage in learning. Before- and after-school professional learning communities. Online learning fitting varied schedules. These alternatives have their own challenges but may serve learning better than designated PD days.
The framing of PD days affects their reception. Days presented as learning opportunities that teachers have requested differ from days presented as mandatory attendance for administrative agendas. Teacher involvement in PD planning affects whether PD feels like imposition or opportunity.
Toward More Effective Professional Development
Improving professional development requires multiple changes. Aligning PD with research on effectiveness rather than continuing ineffective traditions. Differentiating based on actual teacher needs. Connecting PD to classroom application with follow-up support. Evaluating whether PD actually improves practice rather than assuming it does. These changes require system commitment to PD quality.
Teacher involvement in PD planning could improve relevance and engagement. Teachers identifying their own learning needs and pursuing options that address them may learn more than those assigned to predetermined sessions. Professional learning communities where teachers learn together in ongoing relationship may be more effective than expert presentations.
Rethinking the role of credentials in salary advancement might reduce paper-chase dynamics. If salary advancement depended on demonstrated improvement rather than course completion, incentives would change. This shift would require performance assessment systems that don't currently exist—but the current credential-based system has its own problems.
Questions for Consideration
How much of the professional development you've experienced actually improved your practice? What would make professional development more valuable? Should teacher salary advancement continue to depend on credential accumulation? How might systems distinguish effective PD from paper-chase compliance?