top of page
Brick Construction

Compilation of PL Strategy

Every great construction must begin with the a solid framework built on a firm foundation.  This semester, the goal was to create an alternate professional learning (PL) or professional development(PD) course to model to the educators that will be implementing our innovation proposal.  Research has shown that although millions of dollars are spent on professional development every year. It  neither changes teacher practice nor improves student learning (Gulamhussein,2013). How do we effectively educate our educators? Are we willing to change our methods in delivering PL  so that we encourage teachers to change their practices inside the classroom? Gulamhussein and the Center for Public Education  has put forth 5 key principles that are the framework to build a professional learning plan that is highly effective. 

5 principles.jpg

We wanted to devise a call to action for our alternative PL strategy. This is to acknowledge that PL is usually not very effective and to cultivate a desire for your perspective audience to want to change with you. We want to incorporate all these 5 elements into the plan so we can really produce a change.  The next item was to create an outline that would connect the principles together with actionable items and monitor the progress until full implementation is obtained. 


This program is designed for radiography faculty to implement across the courses of procedures, image acquisition, image evaluation, and clinical. The faculty needs modeling of activities as well as access to Microsoft virtual desktop, IT support, and actionable activities. 


My PL plan has multiple levels to foster collaboration.  Additionally, technical support and supplemental support videos along with a lead faculty will be involved in every element of the implementation so there is always collaboration happening in case modifications need to be implemented if we see that the modeling is ineffective. I will be using action learning as described by Revans (1982) which is experiential learning using real-life scenarios as one of the basic elements to increase collaboration.

The principles of collaboration and engagement emphasized in the document for the success of the blended learning initiatives are as follows:

  1. Initial Engagement: This involves actively engaging faculty and students from the outset, ensuring they are involved in the process and understand the goals of the blended learning initiatives.

  2. Content Specificity: The document stresses the importance of tailoring the blended learning approach to the specific content and needs of the RADR program, making sure that the activities and assessments are relevant and effective for the subject matter.

  3. Support for Implementation: There is a strong focus on providing faculty with the necessary support, such as technical assistance and professional development, to successfully implement blended learning strategies.

  4. Active Engagement: The plan encourages ongoing and active engagement of both faculty and students throughout the implementation of the blended learning initiatives. This includes regular check-ins, discussions, and adjustments based on feedback.

  5. Modeling: The document highlights the use of modeling as a key strategy for demonstrating effective blended learning practices. Faculty members model the use of technology and teaching methods for their peers and students.

  6. Faculty Engagement: Engaging faculty in the process is crucial, and the document outlines various ways to involve faculty, such as through walk and talk sessions, discussion forums, and collaborative decision-making.

  7. Technical Support: Recognizing the technical aspects of blended learning, the document ensures that faculty have access to resources like the Microsoft virtual desktop and technical support personnel to address any issues.

  8. Ongoing Collaboration: The plan calls for the establishment of discussion forums and other collaborative spaces where faculty and students can share ideas, provide feedback, and work together to improve the blended learning experience.

  9. Assessment and Adjustment: The document emphasizes the importance of assessing the effectiveness of the blended learning activities and making adjustments based on the feedback from both faculty and students.

  10. Shared Decision Making: There is a commitment to involving faculty and students in the decision-making process, allowing for shared ownership of the blended learning initiatives and encouraging a sense of responsibility and investment in their success.

These principles are designed to foster a collaborative and engaging environment that supports the successful integration of blended learning into the RADR program.


All faculty involved in this process will have the opportunity to discuss and make modifications in cooperation with the lead faculty and support faculty. This will foster self-directed learning as we navigate a more comprehensive PL that isn't one size fits all. Will (2022) explains that PD should be focused on instructional strategies and not content knowledge so that we are changing the way we deliver content. We will work to use those strategies to create opportunities for faculty to learn by experience. 

The specific elements that will work to produce self-directed learning by the faculty are identified below.

  1. Initial Engagement and Content Specificity: The plan begins with activities that immediately engage faculty, such as watching a short video to define blended learning and participating in "walk and talk" sessions. These activities are content-specific, ensuring that faculty are immersed in relevant discussions from the outset.

  2. Modeling and Support for Implementation: Faculty are provided with opportunities to observe modeled class activities and assessments, which serve as a foundation for self-directed learning. They are also supported with resources like the Microsoft virtual desktop and technical assistance, empowering them to explore and implement new teaching strategies independently.

  3. Collaborative Learning: The plan emphasizes collaboration as a key driver of self-directed learning. Faculty are encouraged to work together in pairs or groups, share ideas, and create "one-take videos" based on their collaboration. This collaborative approach allows faculty to learn from each other and develop their own teaching methods.

  4. EduProtocols and Discussion Forums: The use of EduProtocols (Thin Slides) and discussion forums facilitates structured yet open-ended discussions. These platforms enable faculty to share what they have learned, ask questions, and reflect on their experiences, all of which are essential components of self-directed learning.

  5. Backward Design and Assessment: Understanding Backward Design is a core element of the plan, which involves setting objectives, learning activities, and assessments. This process encourages faculty to think critically about their teaching goals and methods, leading to more self-directed approaches to course design and assessment.

  6. Faculty Engagement and Modeling: The plan includes specific roles for lead faculty who will model effective teaching practices and provide support. This approach allows faculty to observe best practices and then apply them in their own teaching, fostering a sense of ownership over their professional development.

  7. Ongoing Collaboration and Feedback: The establishment of discussion forums and regular feedback sessions ensures that faculty have ongoing opportunities to discuss their experiences, share insights, and make adjustments to their teaching practices based on feedback from peers and students.

  8. Action Learning Sets: The plan includes action learning sets for discussion, which are practical, problem-solving sessions where faculty can apply their learning to real-world scenarios. This hands-on approach promotes self-directed learning by addressing actual challenges in the classroom.

  9. By integrating these strategies, the Professional Development Plan aims to create an environment where faculty are actively engaged in their own learning, continuously reflecting on and improving their teaching practices in a collaborative and supportive setting.


Each area of implementation will have faculty specific to those courses that will lead the modeling for that section. They are identified on the outline as the leaders of each section. I will be the overall lead and inside each area for guidance as we move through each section of presentation, discussion, action sets, and revision. 


Here you can find my completed template for my BHAG which is the utilizing backward design. This format I have been to be the most effective for both my innovation plan and my professional development planning. You start with the end goal in mind and then create assignments and lessons based on your ultimate goal.


My entire PL will be fully implemented over the course of 2 years. This will be 4 cohorts of students but the process will be revised after each cohort of students until full implementation by the faculty is achieved.  If you refer back to my outline, you can find the first rotation of activities that occur at the beginning, middle and end of each 8 weeks. These dates and reviews are for faculty processes within the cohort.

The key activities planned for the summer semester 2024 and the fall semester 2024 (A and B) focus on enhancing faculty and student collaboration through various initiatives:

Summer Semester 2024:

  • Defining blended learning through a short video and presenting an innovation proposal.

  • Engaging in "walk and talk" sessions in pairs for faculty to discuss their experiences with blended learning.

  • Creating "one-take videos" as a collaborative effort.

  • Discussing the use of alternative professional learning (PL) strategies for classroom implementation.

  • Day 1: Understanding Backward Design with classroom observations and modeling opportunities for collaboration via discussion boards between new students and 1st semester clinical students.

  • Week 4: Faculty reviews the discussion board and leads faculty reports to introduce new scenarios.

  • Week 8: Soliciting feedback from both faculty and students about what worked and what didn't, and making appropriate adjustments.

Fall Semester 2024 (A):

  • Explaining the importance of teacher collaboration and reviewing assessment as learning.

  • Coordinating current practices with the next level of collaboration between Imaging 1 and Procedures 2.

  • Students making exposures on phantoms to mirror their procedures on people.

  • Week 4: Faculty review of student discussion board to check for correct implementation of feedforward.

  • Week 8: Lead faculty checks for correct implementation of the virtual desktop for collaboration among cohorts and faculty.

Fall Semester 2024 (B):

  • Discussing how collaboration leads to great ideas.

  • RADR 1202 faculty modeling lab procedure for RADR 2331 faculty and demonstrating where courses can intersect.

  • Creating cooperative activities for students by evaluating assessment outcomes of current activities.

  • Week 4: Assessing discussion board, new action learning sets for image evaluation to be modeled by faculty.

  • Week 8: Reviewing discussion boards and assignments and adjusting accordingly.

These activities are designed to foster a collaborative environment where faculty and students can engage in meaningful discussions, share ideas, and improve the learning experience through blended learning strategies.

These activities will repeat through 4 cohorts of students until full implementation is obtained.


All resources and sessions have been updated and are found on the PL PLAN as well.  They can be located under the tabs for activities, evidence, collaboration, resources, and to-do's.

Examples for my sessions include discussion boards  and action sets. 


When implementation is complete for each cohort, we will review and make modifications until all faculty feel that the implementation is worthwhile and we are using a true blended learning model across the radiography curriculum.  We will use the criteria provided by Guskey (2002) First, are the participants engaged and satisfied with the PL elements? Do the faculty have the new knowledge and skills intended from the PL? Has the organization supported, accommodated, and advocated for this change and do they feel it was effective? Do the students feel that the implementation was worthwhile? Lastly, are the student outcomes of cognitive, affective and psychomotor showing improvement?  All these outcomes must be thoroughly investigated to see if the overall goals of implementation have been attained.


Gulamhussein, A. (2013). Teaching the teachers effective professional development in an era of high               stakes accountability. Center for Public Education. Retrieved from                                                      

Guskey, T. R. (2002, March 1). Does it make a difference? evaluating professional development.                            UKnowledge.

Heather Hill. (2015). Review of the mirage: Confronting the hard truth about our quest for teacher                development. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved                                                                from 

Hebern, M. (n.d.). EduProtocol field guides (Volumes 1 and 2). Retrieved from                                             

Revans, R. W. (1982). The origins and growth of action learning. Bromley, UK: Chartwell-Bratt.

Will, M. (2022, October 25). What works—and what doesn’t—in teacher PD. Education Week.                   

bottom of page