What Difference Does it Make? Impact of Montana's CSPD

Abstract

In this article, the evaluation efforts of the Comprehensive System of Personnel Development (CSPD) Council in the state of Montana are discussed. The Montana CSPD Councils, at state and regional levels, attempt to ensure an adequate supply of fully qualified educators and related service providers to meet the needs of all school children in the state, including students with disabilities. In earlier work, the five regional councils developed to plan and implement professional development programs and activities have been presented (Fishbaugh, Christensen, & Bailey, 1995), as has the needs assessment process employed in each region to identify and prioritize needs and activity to address needs (Fishbaugh, Rude, & Bailey-Anderson, 1998). This paper provides information with regard to evaluation of these efforts.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Copenhaver,

(1997). Montana comprehensive system of personnel development: Impact evaluation. Logan, UT: Mountain Plains Regional Resource Center.

Erickson,

R.N.

, Ysseldyke,

J.E.

, Thurlow,

M.L.

, & Elliott,

(1998). Inclusive assessments and accountability systems: Tools of the trade in educational reform. Teaching Exceptional Children 31(2), 4–9.

Fishbaugh,

M.S.E.

, Christensen,

, & Bailey,

(1995). Montana's Big Sky Country: A CSPD runs through it! Rural Special Education Quarterly, 14(4), 3–8

Fishbaugh,

M.S.E.

, Christensen,

, & Rude,

(1998). Regional Comprehensive System of Personnel Development Council activity in Big Sky Country. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 17(1), 33–40.

Fishbaugh,

M.S.E.

, Christensen,

, Rude,

, & Bailey-Anderson,

(1998). Regional Comprehensive System of Personnel Development Council activity in Big Sky Country. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 17(1), 33–40.

0Furshong,

(1998). CSPD: Alive and well (thank you) in Montana. The CSPD Communicator, 2(5), 3.

Guskey,

T.R.

(1996). The age of accountability. Journal of Staff Development, 19(4), 36–43

Guskey,

T.R.

& Sparks,

(1996). Exploring the relationship between staff development and improvements in student learning. Journal of Staff Development, 17(4), 34–38.

Hatch,

(1998). The differences in theory that matter in the practice of school improvement. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 3–32.

10.

Joyce,

(1993). The link is there, but where do we go from here? Journal of Staff Development, 14 (3), 10–12.

11.

Miller,

S.M.

, Nelson,

M.W.

& Moore,

M.T.

(1998). Caught in the paradigm gap: Qualitative researchers' lived experience and the politics of epistemology. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 377–418.

12.

National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (1995). Balanced system of accountability. Alexandria, VA: Author.

13.

Schmoker,

M.J.

(1996). Results: The key to continuous school improvement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

14.

Terwillinger,

(1997). Semantics, psychometrics, and assessment reform: A close look at “authentic” assessments. Educational Researcher, 26(8), 24–26.

15.

Westat, Incorporated. (1994). Issues and options in outcomes-based accountability for students with disabilities. College Park, MD: Center for Policy Options in Special Education.