I’ll offer a counterargument to my own previous post. No doubt a few readers reflected that the Danielson Rubric is all about defining good teaching. As such, learning the rubric ought to offer some insights into good teaching. I don’t deny this.
Nonetheless, a quality PD (professional development) needs to be more targeted than the average explanation of the Danielson Rubric can offer. Asking, “What does proficiency in Domain 2d, Managing Student Behavior, look like?” may provide some insight to teachers. For the unfamiliar, proficiency in Domain 2d is described as follows: “Teacher response to misbehavior is appropriate and successful and respects the student’s dignity, or student behavior is generally appropriate.”
Asking, “How does “proficiency” in 2d differ from being “distinguished” in this area?” may also provide some insight. Distinguished 2d, Managing Student Behavior, is defined as follows: “Teacher response to misbehavior highly effective and sensitive to students’ individual needs, or student behavior is entirely appropriate.”
I’m not saying these PDs are useless. I am merely noting that they represent a suboptimal use of PD time. New teachers would benefit more from targeted PDs that directly teach classroom management techniques, for example. Special education teachers would benefit more from learning the latest research on autism than from group discussions on 2e, “Safety and Arrangement of Furniture.”