This EAGER explored the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on computer science (CS) education professional development (PD) programs. The shift toward virtual PD delivery models necessitated rethinking PD design, rollout, and assessment. We administered a comprehensive survey to 29 providers, conducted three case studies, and interviews in Summer and Fall 2021 to document the lasting impacts of Covid-19 on CSPD offerings. We shared what we learned through academic papers, webinars, a comprehensive report, virtual CSPD guidebook, and a CSPD evaluation toolkit. Summary findings are provided below:

PLANNING FOR PD 

Schedule. Providers revised their PD schedules, exploring overall duration, the balance of synchronous and asynchronous activities, tool selection, the inclusion of physical computing experiences, and the accessibility and logistics of physical materials. 

Tools. Two practices that helped to smooth the use of third-party tools include having a dedicated technical support facilitator during the PD to respond to technical help questions and holding pre-PD tool orientation sessions designed to free PD time for instructional content by working with teachers to set up accounts, install software, and become familiar with the PD tools before the PD began.

Incentives. Since 2020 programs did not involve housing or travel costs, many providers re-allocated their budget. Some programs chose to reduce or eliminate registration fees. A common incentive provided related to professional credits. Of the 23 programs reporting their incentive strategies, 76% of them offered some kind of credential to teachers in 2020. 

Facilitators and facilitator training. Some facilitators were part of the core programmatic team that developed the summer 2020 PD and therefore did not require separate facilitator training. Many facilitators were themselves CS teachers trained through the PD program in past years. Projects training new facilitators focused on techniques for virtual PD, such as how to combat video call fatigue and how to use technology, including navigating the platform and organizing materials in the LMS. 

Other examples of changes to PD implementation included creating videos of difficult concepts for teachers, reviewing modules to ensure they would work remotely, and having facilitators script their content delivery. Multiple providers reported that facilitators wanted more preparation for best practices in online instruction and that facilitators would have preferred more practice with the tools. Other providers realized that they needed more facilitators; for example, one facilitator was needed to monitor the chat during synchronous meetings while the other presented the content.

Challenges with virtual PD were mitigated by high levels of collaboration and support between facilitators.

DELIVERING CONTENT

As reported by the providers, PD delivery was dependent on the choices made prior to PD around scheduling, LMS tools, and facilitator training, as well as the goals and objectives for the PD as they related to teacher knowledge and skills. Many of the providers modeled pedagogy for offering CS instruction online in anticipation of a virtual or hybrid academic year with an emphasis on facilitating discussions and conducting ongoing assessments. 

Providers recognized that participants missed opportunities to interact in person, yet also highlighted ways they worked virtually to build community among participants. One provider noted during a follow-up conversation, ?We found that creating community ahead of our PD was important! We began hosting ?Coffee and CS Ed? Zoom check-in calls weekly on Fridays when the pandemic began and felt that the network from those calls and the structure of coming together for conversation, collaboration, and troubleshooting helped to set the stage for success in our virtual summer PD sessions.? 

EVALUATING PD

We asked each provider what data they collected as part of their process among seven common constructs for teacher PD: program satisfaction, self-efficacy, content knowledge (self-reported and assessed), pedagogical content knowledge (self-reported and assessed), and interest in teaching CS (McGill et al. 2021). Nine of the 29 PD providers (31%) did not report collecting any data related to these constructs, while 16 (55%) collected data related to program satisfaction. Self-efficacy data were collected by 8 of the twenty-nine (28%) programs, and interest in teaching CS data were collected by five (17%) of these providers. 

The move to virtual PD had little perceived impact on the growth of participants; however, given the limited data, we considered this result unrepresentative across the entire set of providers for our study.

Three things we learned from our follow-up

• Teacher engagement in PD is down (as of summer/fall 2021)
• PD assessments are essential
• PD-based teacher communities are becoming regional/national in focus, and less localized

Four Ways PD is Becoming More Customized

• On-demand or just-in-time PD is needed. 
• PD is increasingly adaptive to the experience level of the teachers.
• PD providers are prioritizing offerings based on enrollment.
• Virtual PD has shifted the business model. Providers that historically cultivate locally-offered PD through partners (for example, a regional hub or a district) are now offering PD through the PD provider?s main site.

Last Modified: 05/11/2022
Modified by: Rebecca Zarch