Evaluation of learning in professional development is often underused, though it can be valuable for professional developers, participants, and other stakeholders (Loucks-Horsley, Love, Stiles, Mundry, & Hewson, 2003). As an important contributor toward continuing improvement, a well-designed evaluation provides a compelling picture of a PD and identifies changes that should be made going forward (Loucks-Horsely et al., 2003). Successes, shortcomings, and changes should be examind, using a wide range of instruments and sources of information (Loucks-Horsely, et al., 2003).

Carefully planning for the evaluation from the start makes it possible to generate evidence about the impact of the PD that is more helpful than simply asking the participants “how well they enjoyed” the PD (Hirsch & Killion, 2009). Five critical levels of professional development evaluation have been distinguished, ranging from simple to more complex, with each level building on the one before it (Guskey, 2002):

• Level 1: Participants’ reactions – was the time meaningful and well spent
• Level 2: Participants’ learning – a measure of knowledge and skills gained
• Level 3: Organizational support and change – policies in place to ensure sustained PD learning
• Level 4: Participants’ use of new knowledge and skills – differences in professional practice
• Level 5: Student learning outcomes – positive impact on student learning

Evidence of each of these stages can be gathered using comparison groups and pre/post measures. (See Guskey, 2002, for references for more in-depth descriptions).

Measurement should concentrate on critical core features of teachers’ learning experiences, not on the specific content of the PD (Desimone, 2009). These features can be captured in a variety of ways, in a “mosaic” of methods (Heller, Daehler, & Shinohara, 2003), incorporating observation, interviews, and surveys, as well as formative and summative evaluations, among other means of gathering evidence.

It is imperative to discern between outputs and outcomes (Learning Forward, 2014). Outcomes are indicators of success in achieving the goals of the PD, such as how educator practice will change and how student learning will improve. Outputs, while important, can be a learning plan that is produced during the PD or data about participants, such as their impression of a presenter, etc. – professional development elements unrelated to outcomes (Learning Forward, 2014). Evaluation should focus not on “activities” that are unrelated to sustained learning, but on learning experiences connected to outcomes (Learning Forward, 2015).

As mentioned in discussions of “what works” in PD, key features that need to be assessed include in-depth science content, active learning opportunities, coherence and alignment of curriculum and standards, duration and length of contact time, and a presence of processes for collective participation (Heller et al., 2003; Desimone, 2009; Ingvarson, Meiers, & Beavis, 2003). Planners and evaluators should build in feedback loops each day to respond to what was clear and what was not clear in any presentations. Providers must also assess continually how participants are feeling, understanding the material, and participating in the various learning experiences so that they can provide adjustments as needed.

While it continues to be important to evaluate the delivery of PD, it is even more important to understand what participants actually learn, when and how they begin to apply their learning, and when and how it benefits students. PD is a process not an event (Mizell, H., 2003; Heller at al., 2003), and changes in the classroom due to the implementation of what was learned in the PD may take time to evolve.

For more in-depth guides to evaluating learning in professional development, see Haslam (2010), Killion (2003), Pendray & Crockett (2016), Loucks-Horsely et al, Guskey (2002), and Learningforward.org.