Implementing a CPD Model: Teaching and Learning Development Groups (Cycle One)

CLICK TO GO BACK TO INTRODUCTION

Before implementation of the groups, I referred to the school development plan which had been co-created with staff. An objective in the plan was to develop differentiation strategies. This was in response to my own observations, our most recent report from the Independent Schools Inspectorate (ISI) and the Special Educational Needs (SEN) code of practice, which places greater responsibility on teachers to cater for differing needs in the classroom. Therefore, differentiation seemed like a perfect theme to focus on in the Teaching and Learning Development Groups. 

Once the theme of differentiation had been chosen, a staff meeting took place to explain the vision behind the CPD model and the potential benefits of the Teaching and Learning Development Groups. In addition, a structure and timeline of one year was shared. Kotter and Whitehead (2010) believe that the success of change depends on how the vision is communicated and understood. They go on to say that there needs to be an opportunity for others to engage with the vision. Therefore it was important to allow staff the opportunity to ask questions and clarify any misunderstandings at this point. Another key part at this stage of the process was to offer the opportunity for staff to lead and facilitate one of the groups. Fullan (2008) points out the importance of developing many leaders at the same time, instead of depending on individuals. He believes this will help the establishment as an entirety to learn and develop. 

Following on from the initial staff meeting, five teachers volunteered to facilitate a group, allowing staff to be divided into five Teaching and Learning Development Groups. The next stage of the process was to meet with these facilitators and set a framework for the Teaching and Learning Development Group sessions. Six sessions were scheduled for the year, giving all staff enough time to try out new ideas and strategies in between each session. A template was drawn up giving the facilitators a way to structure the sessions. Each session would provide a chance to discuss progress and an opportunity to share new ideas or solve a problem around differentiation that could be tried out before the next session. As well as the template, the facilitators were equipped with resources on differentiation including ideas and literature. They were also encouraged to do their own research and provide their own material. This was to provide a balance between giving structure to the CPD model through organisational methods while at the same time, allowing the facilitators to feel a sense of control. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) point out that trying to alter behaviour by force usually backfires, whereby providing unlimited choice can result in confusion and frustration. They recommend a nudge or a prod to start the process. 

During the year, each staff member attended the scheduled Teaching and Learning Development Group sessions, which took place periodically over the year during a regular Monday staff meeting. I visited each group to either listen or participate, to gain an understanding of how the groups where progressing but also to make sure I was able to contribute and learn new ideas and strategies myself. Robinson et al. (2009) explain that by participating in both formal and informal contexts, a leader gains a deeper appreciation of the initiative and its implications on teachers. Following each session, the staff were expected to try something new or different before the next meeting. There were no restrictions on what they could try or specific strategies imposed on them. The choice was up to them, as long as they had something to share at the next session. This would allow teachers to choose differentiation practices that suited the needs of their class. This was an important aspect of the model, as CPD that focuses on new practices removed from the context of the classroom and the children, are not likely to be translated into that environment (Timperley, 2011). 

Towards the end of the Summer Term, a full staff meeting was organised where each group had the opportunity to share their differentiation journey with a wider group. This sharing stage was an attempt to create a sense of collective responsibility, while at the same time providing a forum for feedback and reflection. These are key components that contribute to teachers improving their practice (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2012). 

CYCLE 2