L. I. T

T his post is in four parts as it is rather long and I don't want you to fall asleep. I have taken segments out of my dissertation to share my journey of implementing a CPD model in my school setting:  Using Teaching and Learning Development Groups as a model of CPD is based on ideas outlined in Allison’s (2014) book ‘ Perfect Teacher-Led CPD ’. Allison describes several practical tried and tested CPD strategies, one of which he calls Learning Development Groups. I chose this model as it appeared to be relatively straightforward to implement and allowed teachers to retain some independence within a framework. The structure of the Teaching and Learning Development Groups would provide the teachers with an opportunity to meet regularly throughout the school year to discuss and share best practice, support each other and try out new teaching strategies and ideas (Allison, 2014). I felt that the model would create an expectation of school improvement, while at the same time...

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...

CLICK TO GO BACK TO CYCLE 1 At the end of cycle one, a questionnaire was distributed to gather feedback from staff about the CPD model and what could be improved. The outcomes from the cycle one feedback influenced the design of cycle two.  It was clear from the evidence gathered that staff felt that involvement from an expert would help them move forward with their thinking. They reported that they had only shared what they already knew about differentiation before the implementation of the Teaching and Learning Development Groups had taken place, and that the impact on the way they were teaching was small. In addition, the teachers preferred the Teaching and Learning Development Group sessions to be more practical and they felt that they would benefit from having more opportunities to share their thinking with the wider group. These are all key themes identified by Timperley  et al.  (2007) of what works best with professional development. Therefore, these fa...

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 seve...