1.3.7 Annual Professional Growth Plan

Need for Professional Growth Plans

Acceptable evidence of “effective teaching” has changed as accountability issues have demanded stronger evidence of student achievement. Barr and Tagg’s foundational article, From Teaching to Learning: A New Paradigm for Undergraduate Education (1995), characterizes the essential nature of the change as a paradigm shift from an instruction paradigm toward a learning paradigm. In the Instruction Paradigm, the mission of the college is to provide instruction. In the Learning Paradigm, the mission of the college is to produce learning. Implicit in this shift is that educators take ownership of their own professional development and that they value this growth. Kay McClenney summed up the situation well at the conclusion of a major project that was sponsored by the League for Innovation in the Community College: “People are foreseeing the need to significantly change in the roles of faculty and other professional. . . .The shift from deliverer of knowledge to facilitator of learning may be only the tip of the proverbial iceberg, as people consider possibilities as diverse as case managers, distance learning specialists, and unbundling of instruction from the assessment of learning. Such changes, they say, should be dictated by evidence of what works in facilitating student learning (2002).”

Moving toward a learning paradigm calls for changes not only in the delivery of education, but also in the way that outcomes of education are defined and measured. As institutions become more deliberate in establishing goals, criteria, and tools for measurement of student learning, so must the individuals involved be more intentional in developing the knowledge, skills, and tools to address this change. This includes assessment of their current levels of performance against their vision of what they hope to become. In the past, effective teaching has been measured using indirect measures of student learning such as faculty/student ratios, syllabi with topics covered, and course evaluations. Most accrediting organizations now expect direct evidence of student learning such as criterion referenced exams, performance-based rubrics, and reflective essays. For this transformation to be successful, educators must engage in formalized professional development, and their institutions should reward the implementation of such plans.

At several colleges and universities individuals are already engaging in annual professional growth planning that aligns their work with that of their institutions. Educators in these contexts often work in teams to design and achieve personal outcomes that align with institutional missions and strategic plans. These efforts help faculty improve their performance in their chosen fields. For example, in the University of Wisconsin–Madison report, Knowing Your Track Record (2006), these plans viewed as a reference point to check one’s focus and level of effort over a period of time. Professional plans help faculty “think smarter in a team environment and be more entrepreneuria.”

Historically the culture of academia has not included the public sharing of goals and measures of success with supervisors and colleagues. By contrast, most business cultures today consider it good practice to ensure that growth is methodical, that it supports long-range planning, that it encourages alternative solutions, and that it links the various parts of the organization together even as it promotes individual growth and learning. These practices are just beginning to emerge within the academic sphere. According to the National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education, “real improvement in higher education will come when accountability in higher education is a democratic process through which shared goals are explicitly established, progress is measured and work to improve performance is motivated and guided (Sheeo, 2005).” Professional growth plans facilitate this dialogue.

Planning Methodology

The module 1.2.4 Profile of a Quality Faculty Member outlines eight dimensions of faculty performance that can be used as the basis for formulating, implementing, assessing, and documenting professional growth. These eight dimensions are aligned with the roles of educators described in 1.2.3 New Faculty Roles for Institutional Effectiveness. It is the responsibility of each faculty and staff member to determine the relevance of these expectations to his or her own work environment, and to reflect on his or her mastery of these roles.

Phase 1—Needs Analysis

1. Analyze institutional priorities in relation to program and personal goals.

Review the institutional goals and strategic initiatives of your college or university.

Determine the parts of your institution’s mission, vision, and strategic plan that have relevance to your position at your institution.

Inventory goals and strategic initiatives within your college/unit to ensure that program goals align with those of the institution, thus increasing the likelihood for support.

Personalize institutional performance and programmatic criteria as they relate to your position. (1.2.3 New Faculty Roles for Institutional Effectiveness)

2. Assess current and desired personal goals and performance needs.

Assess your current performance based on criteria established for the past year.

Develop a vision of the professional performance you desire (short term and long term).

Determine the gaps between your current and desired performance.

Phase 2—Draft Plan

3. Select goals.

Write down all the ideas that would support your professional development in each of the performance categories from Phase 1.

If appropriate, expand any goals you had previously set.

Narrow the goals to a few that are the most important, realistic, and best aligned with the goals of the institution and program.

From this group, select those goals for which you have the greatest passion.

4. Set performance criteria and ways to measure.

For each goal, develop two or more measurable action steps.

To establish criteria for measurement, answer two basic questions for each goal:

Does this action improve and expand learning?

How do we know this action improves and expands learning? (O’Banion, 1997)

Determine one or two measurement tools for each set goal that will provide the type of evidence required to meet the public’s growing demands for evidence of performance (4.1.8 Issues in Choosing Performance Criteria).

Analyze the tools to determine your ability to use and your ability to obtain useful information. Modify your planned tools if you find they will not provide you with meaningful evidence.

Detail the action steps for the outcomes.

Clarify the methods, timelines, and resources needed.

Determine appropriate timing and measures for self-assessment.

5. Review the goals and criteria with your supervisor.

Meet with your supervisor to discuss the professional growth plan.

Review the plan to obtain support for it, or to arrive at a negotiated version of the plan. This gives you an opportunity to learn about best practices that are likely to help you achieve your goals more efficiently, and to identify others with whom you might collaborate. For example, if one of your goals is to implement alternative delivery methods, in order to maximize methods that worked well and minimize those that did not, you might leverage the expertise of another faculty member who has delivered an online class.

Identify the needed resources to accomplish the goals.

Determine support for the resources or the means of acquiring the resources.

Clarify the actions needed to acquire the resources.

Phase 3—Monitor Plan

6. Implement a plan.

Review the timeline and begin the work needed to accomplish the goals.

Identify steps that might be combined or that may compliment each other so that you can make the most efficient use of time and money.

Review the key milestones determined in the timeline to determine the extent of your progress so you can stay focused or alter your plan as needed.

Use the assessments designated in the timeline to self-assess performance. An SII approach is suggested. (4.1.9 SII Method for Assessment Reporting)

Modify actions as needed to achieve the desired outcomes.

Based on the current assessment, if appropriate, renegotiate changes to the annual plan with your supervisor.

7. Assemble evidence of performance.

Review and compare the results against your plan.

Prepare a report noting accomplishments. The results suggest goals for next year.

Review your progress related to longer-term goals.

Brainstorm new goals for next planning cycle.

8. Share results.

Identify individuals who should be informed about the work that you have been doing or who could provide helpful feedback.

Discuss potential goals and outcomes for the upcoming year with your supervisor and stakeholders.

Share your results with review boards or other stakeholders in support of strategic initiatives.

Concluding Thoughts

Changes are inevitable, and it is helpful to have tools in place to ensure that professional activity is purposeful and forward-focused. In addition, institutions and accrediting agencies alike seek cultures that embrace assessment as a source for development and growth, that routinely practice quality improvement principles, and that readily use the tools associated with those principles. The tools and practices offered within this module are designed to assist faculty members and institutions committed to making faculty development a priority. The annual professional growth plan is a method and process by which one can proactively improve one’s own performance, truly taking on the spirit of self-growth, and promoting enriched learning environments within the classroom, the program, and the institution. The annual professional plan does for the individual what strategic planning does for the institution. By aligning change efforts at the institutional and personal, greater value can be created with wiser use of resources.

References

Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27, (6), 13-25.

McClenney, K. (2002). Learning college project lessons learned. Retrieved December 12, 2005 from <www.league.org/league/projects/lcp/lessons_learned.htm>

O’Banion, T. (1997). Creating more learning-centered community colleges. Phoenix, AZ: League for Innovation in the Community College.

Sheeo, (2005). Accountability for better results: A national imperative for higher education. National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education. Retrieved January 28, 2006, from <www.sheeo.org/account/accountability.pdf>

University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Human Ecology. (2006). Knowing Your Track Record. Retrieved February 24, 2006. [document no longer available.]