Professional Development trainings have a wide range of offerings. They range from basic district programs to new programs that are cutting edge. Defining Professional Development into different segments would promote balance. An educator or district would have clearer goals when preparing, selecting or funding for training. At the same time it would encourage focus for making the greatest impact. For example:
25% on basic district training programs (testing or Common Core training) 25% on district new programs (grade level collaboration, district technology upgrading systems etc) 25% on cutting edge new programs offered outside the district (SCOE or other professional training) *25% on follow up to any of the other segments.
Too much PD in any one area or not enough in any one area would clearly be identified by classifying and segmenting the types of training.
*This is my next idea (there isn't enough follow up on ANY Professional Development)