Implementing a CPD Model: Teaching and Learning Development Groups (What I Learnt)

CLICK TO GO BACK TO CYCLE 2

I continued to collate evidence throughout cycle two which included an interview with several teachers who were involved with the CPD model. What I learnt was that there is not a one size fits all model for CPD. To develop a CPD programme that meets the needs of everyone takes much more than inviting staff to think of ideas for development and then placing them in groups with an expert. They need to be able to develop an inquiring approach into the effectiveness of teaching and learning, where the training meets the demands of the individual teachers but is done in a collaborative way. The learning must be both practical and understood in ways that can be used to solve actual teaching and learning challenges (Timperley, 2011). Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) support this further by stating, ‘People are motivated by good ideas tied to action; they are energised even more by pursuing action with others...’ (p. 7). 

There are several other implications for me as a leader which I need to acknowledge and put into action for my school to move forward successfully. I have summarised these implications into six points. 

1.    Continue to seek out experts to assist the school with their thinking, planning and developments. 

This was a lesson learnt from the end of cycle one and appeared to make a positive difference in cycle two when we had input from the experts. The coaching from the growth mindset expert worked particularly well as staff were able to personalise what they were trying to achieve to their classroom, and it also meant that they were in continual dialogue, adjusting and redesigning their actions as the year progressed. This is something I hope to replicate in future, however enabling teachers to fully engage with this process means that more time needs to be allocated.

2.     Create more capacity to cover teachers so that they have time to devote to their professional learning.

I believe this is one of the most important influences on whether teachers are able to connect with their professional learning. The study indicated that there was evidence to suggest a willingness to develop one’s teaching practice, but the pressure of other school demands hindered this. I was aware of this at the beginning but underestimated how much additional time staff thought they needed to be allocated for the initiative to be successful. We need to develop a set of agreed expectations so that staff have a degree of autonomy with their time, whilst remaining committed to professional development targets. 

3.     Create more opportunities for staff to observe each other.

There are now plans in place which will potentially free up my pastoral duties, giving me more time to put a structure together for teacher observation. I would like to link this to other school procedures such as the school development plan and the appraisal system. I am currently looking at a Lesson Study model which is a teacher-led research model where teachers work together to target a recognised area for development in students’ learning. I think this will complement the Teaching and Learning Development Groups extremely well. 

4.    Build in a layered approach to CPD which is closely tied with school development plans and appraisals but personalised at the same time.

The study revealed how teachers appreciated both in-service training, such as the Teaching and Learning Development Groups, as well as external training. Therefore, I think a layered approach recommended by Allison (2014) would best serve the school’s needs and contribute to a culture of continuous improvement. What is important is that the layered approach needs to align with the whole-school vision, while still providing opportunities for teachers to engage with their own personalised learning on a deeper level. Allison describes the three layers as follows: ‘blanket’, this is development that all teachers need to be involved with and aligns with whole-school priorities, ‘optional’, this is a range of development opportunities personalised to teachers and their own CPD, and finally, ‘directed’, this is where underperforming staff are directed to engage with specific development to support them. In its current format, the Teaching and Learning Development Groups sits somewhere between the blanket layer and the optional layer. I would like to explore the possibility of moving it completely into the optional layer, with the other two layers running alongside the school’s CPD approach. I am currently looking into research from Bryk, Gomez, Grunow and LeMahieu (2015) who have borrowed ideas from improvement science to develop a ‘learning to improve’ process. This is where teachers in schools use collaborative inquiry methods to identify, adapt, and improve interventions in education. This process, tied in with Lesson Study, could be very powerful. 

5.     Leaders should become more involved with CPD through increased participation.

During both Teaching and Learning Development Group cycles, I was torn between wanting to allow the facilitators and experts to take a lead, thereby sharing the leadership, to wanting to be centrally involved with all aspects of teaching and learning within the groups. Leader’s participation and involvement is the most powerful contributing factor to pupil improvement. Despite the obvious challenges, leaders should reduce the amount of unnecessary administrative tasks as much as possible in order to be a fully active participant in professional learning. 

6.     Know thy impact. 

Putting the above points into action is an exciting prospect but there is one final detail that needs to be taken into account, arguably it is the most important. We need to be able to measure the impact of what we are doing. If we are going to employ a number of CPD practices across the school, we need to know that it is not only developing teachers practice but also affecting children’s learning positively. Hattie et al. (2015) has coined the phrase ‘know thy impact’. He emphasises that the way to do this is for leaders to engage with teachers and agree what impact means for their school. Then they can start the process of gathering, analysing, and interpreting data collaboratively from a wide range of sources. Only then will you be able to measure the success of your interventions on children’s learning. I believe it is essential to build this process into all future developments at my school.