Platteville teachers propose uniform application and anonymous review for professional learning requests

Teacher representatives presented a new, districtwide process for requesting professional learning that replaces older triplicate paper forms and asks applicants to show how proposed learning will affect student outcomes.

Laura Digman, a teacher and committee representative, said the committee developed a single application and an accompanying rubric intended to align requests with district goals and Professional Learning Community (PLC) work. “We wanted a uniform way across the district for teachers to be able to apply for, get approval, and attend conferences,” Digman said.

The committee described the workflow: teachers complete an initial application and rubric, which then go to a teacher review committee drawn from building representatives. Review will be anonymous — "the committee won't know who submitted what forms," Digman said — and members will score requests based on the likely impact on student learning. When funds are limited, the highest-scoring proposals will be prioritized.

The presenters said the funds request form, drafted with help from Dimitri, captures anticipated costs such as substitute pay, registration fees, meals and transportation so administrators can estimate the district cost for approved requests. A committee member asked whether staff must complete the application when the district is not paying; presenters replied that if attendance incurs no district cost (for example, unpaid summer offerings with no registration fee), completing the form would not be required.

Board members asked how the process will handle multiple applicants for the same opportunity. The chair said the committee’s priority was to build the system first and address money afterwards: “As we've worked through it, our number one priority was let's build this and talk about money last,” the chair said. Presenters said the rubric and periodic review of prior applications should help surface alternatives — such as suggesting closer or lower-cost options — and that committee membership would rotate so more staff gain familiarity with the process.

Presenters also proposed maintaining a repository of past applications so new teachers can learn which conferences others sought and why, and they emphasized a required post-reflection form asking attendees whether they met their stated learning goals and how they will share learning with colleagues.

The committee closed discussion and moved the agenda forward for the handbook review. No formal vote or motion on adopting the application process occurred at the meeting; presenters described this as an initial draft that can evolve with staff feedback.