The Study
Gary Sykes, professor of educational administration and teacher education, makes the case in this article that professional development and research is centered on behaviorist concepts that stress generic teaching skills. Sykes argues that although topics such as classroom management and cooperative learning are useful, teachers would benefit more from policies and literature that focus on subject matter.

The Findings
Sykes cites several researchers over the years who have made the case for a greater emphasis on the content of instruction. He offers several key ways to maximize the impact of professional development that focus on the content of what is taught in schools. First, intellectually engage teachers in the subject matter of their classrooms and instruct them on how students learn that specific subject. Second, establish a link between teacher and student learning by directly relating the content of professional development to the curriculum. Third, focus on the specific concepts, ideas and skills required of students and engage teachers with similar intellectual work. Although these suggestions seem basic, Sykes states that creating staff development as he has outlined will have complex consequences. It would require different ways of structuring teacher development that would call on finding relevant expertise, while at the same time providing ample room for teacher input. If content-related development with teachers is to succeed, incentives to change current policies will have to be made and stronger links must be forged between schools and university experts.

What It Means to You
Evidence is growing that student achievement corresponds to staff development that engages teachers in learning about the specific topics of the curriculum. What is the shape and emphasis of staff development in your district? Does it focus on topics like time management or teacher expectations, or is it geared toward subject matter?

More Information
Sykes, G. (1999). Make subject matter count. Journal of Staff Development, 20(2), 50-51

<back to 2000 ed-Research Reports