Professional development changes early-years practice when it is sustained over months rather than delivered in a single day, focused on what teachers actually do with children, built around active learning such as observing, trying and reflecting, connected to the school's own curriculum, and done together with colleagues who teach the same children. Coaching in the classroom, small professional learning groups and structured observation of real practice tend to make a difference; one-off lectures, however inspiring, mostly do not.
This article is for principals, curriculum coordinators and owners who are responsible for the professional growth of a preschool team. It summarises what research on teacher learning suggests, describes several formats that suit early childhood settings, shows how to plan a year of professional development around a curriculum, and explains how to tell whether any of it is working.
Why the one-day workshop disappoints
Most preschool leaders have had the experience. A training day goes well, teachers leave enthusiastic, the evaluation forms are positive, and three weeks later classrooms look exactly as they did before. This is not because teachers are unwilling. It is because changing an interaction habit, such as waiting a few seconds longer before answering for a child, or asking an open question instead of giving an instruction, is hard to do from memory in a busy room full of two-year-olds. Habits change through repeated practice with feedback, not through information alone.
A one-day workshop also tends to be generic. A presenter who does not know the school's children, rooms or curriculum can only offer general ideas, and teachers are left to translate them into their own context without support. In a bilingual preschool there is an extra layer: ideas presented in one language may be understood differently by colleagues who work mainly in the other.
None of this means workshops are useless. They are good for introducing a new idea, building shared vocabulary and creating energy. The mistake is treating them as the whole of professional development rather than as the opening move in a longer cycle.
What research says effective professional development has in common
Laura Desimone, in an often-cited 2009 article in Educational Researcher, proposed a set of core features that research consistently associates with professional development that changes teaching: a focus on content and on how children learn it, active learning rather than passive listening, coherence with teachers' existing knowledge and with school goals, sufficient duration both in total hours and in span of time, and collective participation by teachers from the same school or team.
A 2017 review by Linda Darling-Hammond and colleagues at the Learning Policy Institute, which looked at a large number of studies that showed positive effects, reached a similar picture. Effective programmes were content-focused, involved active learning and collaboration, used models of effective practice, provided coaching and expert support, offered time for feedback and reflection, and were sustained over time.
Early childhood has its own body of evidence. Studies of practice-based coaching, an approach associated with researchers such as Patricia Snyder and Mary Louise Hemmeter, describe a cycle of shared goals, focused observation and reflective feedback that has been used to support teachers in implementing specific practices with young children. The common thread across all of this work is simple: teachers change what they do when they practise new approaches in their own classrooms with support, over time, alongside colleagues.
Formats that suit early childhood settings
Preschools rarely have the budget or staffing to release teachers for long courses. The formats below can be built into normal working life, and most can be led by the school's own experienced staff.
| Format | How it works | Best used for |
|---|---|---|
| Classroom coaching | A coach and teacher agree a focus, the coach observes a short period, and they reflect together soon afterwards | Changing specific interaction habits such as questioning, waiting or recasting language |
| Professional learning groups | Four to six teachers meet regularly around a shared question, try something in their rooms and report back | Exploring a curriculum element in depth, such as project work or documentation |
| Peer observation | Teachers visit each other's rooms with an agreed focus and a short follow-up conversation | Spreading good practice sideways and reducing isolation between classes |
| Documentation review | Teams look together at learning stories, photographs or children's work and discuss what they show | Strengthening observation and planning from children's interests |
| Video reflection | With consent, a teacher records a short sequence of her own practice and reviews it with a colleague | Seeing one's own interactions from the outside, which is often surprising |
| Lesson study | A small team plans an activity together, one member teaches it while others observe children, then they revise | Refining how a particular experience is introduced and supported |
Lesson study comes from Japanese school practice and has been adapted in many countries. In a preschool the focus shifts from a lesson to an experience, and the observers watch children's responses rather than the teacher's performance.
Communities of practice and the culture of learning
Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger introduced the idea of communities of practice in 1991 to describe how people learn through participation in a group that shares a craft. A preschool team can become one: teachers who regularly talk about children, share problems and look at each other's work develop a shared understanding that no manual can provide. The leader's role is less to teach than to create the conditions for this to happen.
Those conditions are mostly about time and safety. Teachers need protected time in the week when they are not responsible for children, and they need to feel that admitting uncertainty will not be held against them. A team in which only successes are shared learns very little. A team in which a teacher can say "my small-group time keeps falling apart and I do not know why" and receive thoughtful help learns quickly.
In a bilingual school, communities of practice also help close gaps between Vietnamese and international colleagues. Mixed groups that look at the same children together build a shared view of what good practice is, which is more durable than agreements reached in management meetings.
Planning a year of professional development around the curriculum
A coherent year is more effective than a series of unconnected topics chosen because a trainer was available. A simple planning sequence for a school or network looks like this.
- Choose one or two focus areas that matter most for children this year, for example open questioning in both languages, or planning projects from observations.
- Introduce each focus with a short, practical session that shows what good practice looks like, ideally with examples from the school's own classrooms.
- Set up the cycle of coaching, learning groups or peer visits that will support teachers to try the practice over the following weeks.
- Gather evidence of change in classrooms, such as short observations, documentation samples or teachers' own reflections, rather than counting attendance.
- Review at mid-year with teachers, decide what is working, and adjust the plan for the second half rather than adding new topics.
- Close the year by sharing what has changed, recording it in the curriculum guidance, and choosing the next focus with teachers' input.
The discipline here is restraint. Two focus areas pursued properly for a year will change more than ten topics covered in single sessions.
How to tell whether professional development is working
Thomas Guskey proposed in 2000 a widely used model for evaluating professional development at five levels: participants' reactions, participants' learning, organisational support and change, participants' use of new knowledge and skills, and outcomes for learners. Most schools only ever measure the first level, which is the least informative. Teachers enjoying a session tells a leader very little about whether children will experience anything different.
For a preschool, the most useful evidence usually comes from the fourth level: whether teachers are actually using the practice in classrooms. Short, regular observations focused on the practice in question, documentation that shows changes in how children are supported, and teachers' own accounts of what they have tried give a realistic picture. Outcomes for children should be looked at through observation and development records rather than through tests, which are inappropriate at this age.
The third level, organisational support, is easily forgotten and often decisive. If a school trains teachers in project work but keeps a timetable that cuts every afternoon into twenty-minute slots, the training will fail through no fault of the teachers. Leaders should ask, for every focus area, what in the school's routines, staffing or expectations needs to change for the practice to survive.
Professional development in a bilingual team
A bilingual preschool faces a particular challenge: the same professional development has to reach teachers who work mainly in Vietnamese and teachers who work mainly in English, and who may have trained in very different traditions. A session delivered only in English can leave Vietnamese colleagues following the slides but missing the nuance; a session only in Vietnamese leaves international colleagues relying on a quick summary. Either way, the team ends up with two slightly different understandings of the same idea.
Several habits reduce this risk. Key sessions can be co-led by a Vietnamese and an international colleague, each presenting in their stronger language with the other adding or clarifying. Short written summaries of the main points can be prepared in both languages and checked by someone fluent in both. Learning groups can be deliberately mixed so that teachers explain ideas to each other across languages, which is itself a powerful way of deepening understanding.
It is also worth choosing focus areas that matter equally to both groups. Language practice in a bilingual room is a good example: Vietnamese teachers and English-speaking teachers each have a part to play in building children's vocabulary, extending their talk and supporting children who are not yet speaking in one of the languages. When both groups work on the same practice at the same time, professional development strengthens the team as well as individual skills.
Finally, leaders should notice whose expertise is being treated as the default. If every visiting trainer is a foreigner presenting international approaches, Vietnamese teachers may conclude that their own professional knowledge counts for less. Inviting experienced Vietnamese educators to lead sessions, including on the national programme, on working with Vietnamese families and on children's development in the local context, corrects that impression and enriches the team.
Using external training well
External courses, conferences and specialist trainers have a place. They bring fresh perspectives, expose teachers to practice in other settings and can provide expertise a school does not have internally, for example in supporting children with additional needs or in a particular early-years approach. The key is to connect them to the school's own cycle rather than letting them float free.
A practical habit is to ask anyone who attends an external course to bring back one idea, try it in their room for a few weeks and then share what happened with colleagues. This turns individual attendance into team learning and filters out ideas that sound attractive but do not fit the school's children or curriculum.
Schools working with the Global Nexus curriculum can draw on the training programme for kindergarten owners and teams that sits alongside the curriculum; the details of that programme are published separately rather than on this site.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
Why do one-day training workshops rarely change preschool practice?
Because changing interaction habits requires repeated practice with feedback in one's own classroom. Workshops can introduce ideas and build shared language, but without follow-up such as coaching or peer observation teachers usually return to familiar routines within weeks.
What are the core features of effective professional development?
Research summarised by Desimone and by Darling-Hammond and colleagues points to a focus on content and children's learning, active learning, coherence with school goals, sufficient duration, collaboration among colleagues, coaching and time for feedback and reflection.
What is practice-based coaching in early childhood?
It is a coaching cycle in which a coach and teacher agree a specific goal, the coach observes the teacher using the practice with children, and they reflect together with focused feedback. It has been studied as a way to support teachers in adopting particular practices.
How much professional development time do preschool teachers need?
There is no single figure, but research favours regular, sustained support over months rather than isolated days. Protected weekly time for planning, reflection and collaboration matters more than a large number of separate training hours.
How should a preschool evaluate its professional development?
Beyond asking whether teachers liked a session, leaders should check whether teachers are using the practice in classrooms, whether school routines support it, and how children's experiences have changed, using observation and documentation rather than tests.
Can lesson study work in a preschool?
Yes, with adaptation. A small team plans an experience together, one teacher leads it while others watch the children closely, and the team revises the plan based on what children did. The focus is on children's responses rather than on judging the teacher.