Educational Service Agencies
By: Steven Grossman, Ed.D. and Jill Stirling
Little research exists on the role of Educational Service Agencies
in the provision of teacher professional development.
How do ESAs deliver professional development
to teachers and school districts?
A Hezel Associates survey found out.
Teacher professional development translates to better teaching practices for the improvement of student learning. As good training is key to good performance, it is important to know how professional development and related coaching is implemented in schools. Educational Service Agencies (ESAs) are a significant but often overlooked resource in the provision of professional development and coaching in schools. The Association of Educational Services Agencies defines an ESA as “a public entity created by state statute to provide educational support programs and services to local schools and school districts within a given geographic area.” The names for ESAs vary across states, for example: Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (New York, Colorado), Educational Cooperatives (Connecticut), and Educational Service Agencies (Vermont) to name a few. Yet despite the inconsistency of names, the agencies provide similar key services. Not much literature could be found on the important role ESAs play in teacher professional development, so Hezel Associates conducted a survey to learn more.
Eighty respondents from a broad range of ESAs in 27 states were asked, “Does your ESA provide professional development services to the teachers in your member districts?” The response from 97.5 percent of those surveyed was ‘yes,’ and they were asked to continue with questions aimed to discover the role of ESAs.
The survey found that ESAs play a number of roles in providing professional development to both teachers and instructional coaches, including: direct, centralized training services; group licensing of online software; cooperative purchasing of training; and technical support for hardware, software and connectivity issues. Decisions regarding what professional development services to offer, and when, most frequently come as direct, specific requests from district staff. Also, ESAs frequently make determinations from needs assessment surveys that are periodically sent to professional staff in member districts. Alternatively, decisions are made with “menus” developed by specialists at the agency, with needs based on state-mandated requirements and with planning by committees. These decision-making methods tend to overlap for responding ESAs. One ESA can be using multiple needs assessment techniques for different member districts to determine what services are needed.
The universal professional development service respondents offer is training tailored to individual school and district needs. Two-thirds provide training to coaches shared by districts and on-site coaching for teachers. Other popular services include specific programs with outside presenters and staff training, working with district and school leaders and assisting
schools with analysis. The survey also found that 70.7 percent of responding ESAs provide training for building-level providers of professional development, compared to 29.3 percent that do not. This finding suggests that a significant amount of professional development happens at the building level. These providers go by a number of names, including staff developers, curriculum supervisors, coordinators, professional development specialists and assistant principals.
Professional development training is offered in Math by nearly three-
quarters of ESAs that provide building-level services. English and Language Arts, Science and Social Studies are offered by about half, and smaller percentages offer services in Foreign Language and other content areas (special populations, technology, general education, school improvement, Early Childhood, Reading/Literacy and coaching).
Most of the building-level services focus on the area of curriculum and content, but focus remains somewhat strong around general pedagogy and how to teach or coach adults.
Predominantly, responding ESAs said they use traditional methods for delivering professional development services to teacher and instructional coaches, which includes workshops and conferences. Two-thirds of responding ESAs deliver training through classroom coaching. While fewer 
than half offer teleconferencing and web-based courses, 37 percent of responding ESAs provide support for online programs. There is evidence of a growing presence of video and web-based methods being used to deliver professional development training to teachers and instructional coaches.
Just how large are the professional development budgets of ESAs? About half of the responding ESAs reported having professional development budgets of over $100,000 per district. The median budgets were between $100,000 and $500,000 per district. This finding clearly suggests a considerable amount of resources are directed toward professional development by ESAs on behalf of their member districts.
The funding for such large budgets is a complex system, including money from federal, state and local sources, according to respondents. Funding 
at the federal level is led by IDEA and NCLB, with Perkins and ESL also reported as significant sources. At the state level, funding for 60 percent of responding ESAs comes in the form of categorical aid, with close to the same percentage indicating state aid earmarked for teacher professional development. About half reported using “general funds” not earmarked for professional development. Local funding is charged to the member districts themselves instead of being provided directly to the ESA from an outside funding agency. Most ESAs reported charging the districts a service fee for the costs of the professional development, while in some cases an ongoing service is funded through a cost formula or subscription basis.
The survey also found that almost all responding ESAs evaluate their professional development services and use data from the evaluations to 
improve existing services, design new offerings and report to funding agencies. Ninety-two percent make improvements, 88 percent develop new services and 56 percent report to funding agencies. The evaluations are in the form of written or online questionnaires for more than 90 percent of respondents, while nearly half use observations.
Source: Educational Service Agency, Survey of Current Professional Development Services, Hezel Associates (2006)