Report of the One-Day Professional

B U Z Z

REPORT OF THE ONE-DAY PROFESSIONAL

DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCE

NEVER MIND THE BUZZWORDS

WHAT EVIDENCE SHOWS WORKS IN

CPD FOR TEACHERS

HELD AT

NUT HEADQUARTERS

HAMILTON HOUSE

MABLEDON PLACE

LONDON WC1H 9BD

on

Wednesday, 9 July 2003

NUT CPD PROGRAMME – PUTTING TEACHERS FIRST

REPORT OF THE CPD CONFERENCE:

‘NEVER MIND THE BUZZWORDS -

WHAT EVIDENCE SHOWS WORKS IN CPD FOR TEACHERS’

on Wednesday, 9 July 2003

CONTENTS

Page
Welcome – Chair, Judy Moorhouse / 3
Introduction – Doug McAvoy, General Secretary, NUT / 3
‘Putting Teachers First’ – John Bangs, NUT, Assistant Secretary, Education and Equal Opportunities / 3
‘The Findings of the NUT/EPPI Research Review’ – Philippa Cordingley, Director, CUREE / 4
Participants’ Responses – AM: ‘How will the finding of the Research Review change the way you fulfil your role?’ / 7
‘CPD for the Teaching Profession’ – Sarah Stephens, GTC (England) / 11
‘The Future Role of LEAs in Teachers’ CPD’ – Andrew Seber, President of ConfED / 13
‘Towards the EPD Roll-out – The Early Professional Development Pilot in Lewisham’– Jonathan Humphreys, Lewisham, LEA / 16
Participants’ Responses – PM: Policy Makers, LEA Officers, Teachers / 18
‘What do we know about what works in CPD?’ – Peter Earley, Institute of Education, London / 20
Close of Conference – Judy Moorhouse / 29

Judy Moorhouse, Chair of NUT’s Education and Equal Opportunities Committee and Chair of the CPD Committee of the General Teaching Council (England), welcomed participants.

Doug McAvoy, General Secretary, NUT, introducing the conference, said that the involvement of the Union in CPD had been entirely in keeping with the principles of the NUT. Teachers had an increasing need for support in order to carry out their more demanding roles. The Union had investigated teachers’ perceptions of what they considered to be important and looked at how professional development was being approached in America. Guidance had been received from education consultant, Philippa Cordingley and, three years previously the NUT had introduced its pilot CPD programme.

The programme had been a great success, which had been reflected in the increase in NUT membership. The programme had attracted a positive response from Estelle Morris and other ministers. A significant budget was now allocated each year to fund the programme, and it was expected that the programme would increase in the future. Doug McAvoy thanked, in particular, John Bangs, Richard Stainton and Executive members who had worked to implement the programme.

John Bangs, Assistant Secretary – Education and Equal Opportunities, NUT, began by looking back over changes in attitudes over the last 10 years towards teachers’ CPD. Research in the mid-90s, lead by John McBeath, showed that teachers themselves rated CPD as a low priority. A more recent research by the University of Herfordshire indicated that teachers’ felt that teacher Unions had no place in the provision of professional development.

The introduction of Performance Management had had some influence in terms of changing attitudes and in stimulating debate within the NUT and elsewhere regarding the professional development needs of teachers. The experience of unions in the United States had also been instrumental in illustrating that professional development can make a difference to teachers’ lives and add value to teaching and learning.

The NUT believed that CPD was central to teachers’ professional needs and had introduced its own highly successful CPD programme. The programme had been developed with the support of the keynote speaker for the conference, Philippa Cordingley. The CPD programme was developed to ensure that teachers benefited from sustained learning. The aim was that each event was practical and of long-term value. The design promoted collaborative working and a sense of collegiality. The programme also reflected the creative element of teaching.

Professional development, nationally, over the next two or three years, would prioritise early career professional development; however, this would only be of real value if funding was extended to ensure all teachers were provided with development opportunities. It would also be beneficial for LEAs to work with teachers to establish professional development that provides action research opportunities for teachers.

John Bangs suggested that the evidence from the Union’s systematic EPPI research project, being presented at the conference, was rich and groundbreaking. The results showed the impact that prioritising CPD could have and had interesting implications for the Union’s programme. In conclusion, he said that the NUT’s professional development programme had ‘reached the parts not reached by other CPD programmes’.

What research tells us about the impact of CPD on teaching and learning - the findings of the NUT/EPPI Research Review

Philippa Cordingley, Director of the Centre for the Use of Research Evidence in Education (CUREE), introduced the findings of the NUT/EPPI Research Review by drawing an analogy with teachers’ schemes of work. They existed on paper and would need to be put to practical use to ensure their usefulness and that was now the situation with the Review.

She described the scope and the systematic process of the research review. Thirteen thousand five hundred research titles and abstracts had been searched; 266 studies had been looked at; 72 studies had been reviewed. Finally, the 17 which met the exact criteria established to assess the impact of CPD on teaching and learning had been analysed in detail.

The review had found research-based evidence of positive links between collaborative, sustained CPD and teachers’:

·  self-confidence;

·  self-efficacy;

·  willingness to continue professional learning;

·  willingness and ability to make changes to practice;

·  knowledge; and

·  repertoire of strategies and ability to choose when to use them..

There was also a rich set of links with pupil/student:

·  motivation;

·  performance, e.g., test results capacity to decode, enhanced reading fluency;

·  responses to specific subjects including mathematics;

·  better organisation of work;

·  increased questioning skills and responses;

·  wider range of learning activities.

The review identified the characteristics of CPD with these positive outcomes:

·  the use of external expertise linked to school-based activity;

·  observation and feedback;

·  emphasis on peer support rather than leadership by supervisors;

·  scope for teacher participants to identify own CPD focus;

·  processes to encourage, extend and structure professional dialogue;

·  processes for sustaining CPD over time to embed practices in their own classrooms, e.g., on course planning.

Effective CPD built on what teachers knew, believed, or could do already, and what they wanted to achieve with their pupils.

Philippa Cordingley went on to say that there were implications for teachers, policy-makers and researchers. For teachers, identifying collaborative CPD opportunities would be of particular benefit. They could also explore with colleagues whether non-collaborative CPD could be followed-up collaboratively within school. Action research, observation and feedback were also effective means of ensuring sustained professional development.

She cited the example of a secondary school that had sent 27 teachers on NUT TEACHER2TEACHER programmes and then created a learning forum so that individual learning had been transformed into whole-school learning. This had been a cost-effective means of development through investment in a critical mass of the teaching staff.

She highlighted the importance of balancing cost and quality:

·  collaboration, coaching grounded in classroom observation and sustained support related to it all matter and are costly. How could these be prioritised and funding ensured?

·  emphasise the benefits of effective CPD and costs of wasted CPD…;

·  build internal peer coaching expertise as a lasting resource within the school;

·  it may be better to seek fewer opportunities of this sort than several cheaper, more episodic opportunities which had little impact.

She said that teachers/schools must take control of getting the right combination of activities.

·  No one element worked on its own.

·  Pairs and groups of practitioners could combine separate opportunities and let CPD providers know about established in-school coaching or peer coaching programmes so that they can help individuals integrate course inputs with coaching.

She reminded participants that, when teachers are trying out new strategies, things could get worse before they got better. That was when the benefits of coaching could be greatest and these would far outweigh any anxieties at being observed (by a peer). The benefits could spread way beyond the particular CPD focus.

Philippa Cordingley went on consider how existing policies might be reviewed in the light of the research findings. In particular she suggested that consideration might be given to whether current CPD programmes could make a greater contribution to recruitment and retention if they were organised on a collaborative basis. It was also important to consider whether activities reflected fully the needs of teachers - the needs of the school must not overshadow such consideration. The findings illustrated the importance of providing good information to teachers and, subsequently, enabling dissemination of best practice.

Throughout the presentation participants were given the opportunity to raise questions on aspects of the research. In response to the question of what was important in terms of leadership Philippa said that peer support needed to be collegiate rather than managerial in order to engender a sense of ownership. This peer involvement acted as a buffer zone between practice and accountability. In response to a question about funding of CPD, Philippa cited research which suggested that minimal observation, for example, as little as ten-minutes, with a clear, agreed, focus on one aspect of teaching, could provide a basis for significant professional learning.

Providers, at every level, could conceive and describe CPD opportunities in terms of the messages from the research so that teachers and schools know exactly what they are buying into. For example, CPD providers could describe in more detail how they will:

·  respond specifically to the needs of teachers at different stages of development;

·  encourage and support the development of in-school coaching;

·  provide specialist input; and

·  sustain effort over time.

Philippa Cordingley said that policy-makers could consider how far dissemination of best practice is conceived as a learning process that includes detailed and expert specification of excellence, but embeds this in combinations of CPD activities specifically structured to meet the needs of the learners.

They should also consider encouraging schools to buy into CPD programmes involving sustained collaborative working and coaching by:

·  encouraging schools to cluster together for different CPD inputs;

·  achieving a critical mass of teachers with peer coaching skills so that all CPD can be sustained between external inputs; and

·  making links with existing ITT programmes to build on and embed coaching and mentoring skills.

Finally, Philippa Cordingley said that CPD in these studies involved a strong sense of accountability to colleagues and to pupils. Policy-makers, at every level, should consider whether accountability to fellow participants in CPD programmes and to pupils can or should be developed to create fit for purpose evaluation instruments where evidence collected contribute directly to the CPD.

The findings of the review clearly illustrated the importance of teachers feeling engaged-ownership-in their professional development.[1]

Addendum: Website references suggested by Philippa Cordingley

Ø  School Based Research Consortia Initiative website,

http://www.tta.gov.uk/itt/providers/research/school/index.htm

Ø  EPPI Impact of CPD review can soon be found in the Research Evidence in Education Library (REEL) http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk//EPPIWeb/home.aspx?page=/reel/intro.htm

Ø  Current NTRP website address is:

http://www.tta.gov.uk/itt/providers/research/panel/index.htm

New address expected launch in Summer is http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ntrp

Ø  The Research in Practice site: http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/research

Ø  GTC Research of the month: http://www.gtce.org.uk/research/romhome.asp

Ø  Neighbourhood Renewal Unit – www.renewal.net/

Ø  CUREE – www.curee-paccts.com

Participants’ Responses : AM

Participants were asked “How will the findings of the NUT/EPPI Research Review change the way in which you carry out your current role?” They wrote their responses on postcards – which were collected and sent to them a few days after the conference - and are reproduced below.

“It will influence the seminar which I am currently preparing for the BFI on Media Education. Media teachers tend to be working in a degree of isolation and peer mentoring etc., could be developed. I supervise students on teaching practice – the knowledge and expertise I am gaining through this work feeds into that work. The Conference also helps to contextualise the work on the Review Group.” (Semi-retired, but Freelance Education/Teacher Trainer (especially in Media Education)
“Endeavour to initiate discussion with the LEA to differentiate between training. Send out new questionnaire into schools based on today. Try and lead the way by getting improvement in CPD for central services, i.e. one day devoted to individual needs as identified in performance management discussions.” (Learning Representative)
“Need to help disseminate findings of research to LEAs which subscribe to The Education Network (TEN) and lead members for Education (use TEN newsletter/TEN Conferences/Networks). Need to ensure that website shows benefits of collaborative CPD for individual teachers, pupils and schools generally. Need to think through and promote ways to cover costs of this type of CPD and how LEAs can support cross-school collaborative CPD.” (Policy officer with The Education Network)
“Establish a dialogue with LEA CPD officer and school CPD co-ordinators to determine whether we can shift the culture of capitulation to decisions to cut all CPD as a response to funding shortfalls into a creative response for considering how teachers will access their ENTITLEMENT to CPD. Re-explore own route to developing skills as a coach/mentor, as well as means to train others in these skills. Write proposal for how to redefine the structure of current CPD opportunities being cancelled due to lack of participants due to funding cuts, to allow those who have signed up to have access to the training in a different way – i.e. school-based collaboration, cluster work, etc. A pre-cursor or parallel to first paragraph above. Build sustaining element into SENCO Training Days – follow up day with invitations to dialogue about P-levels – produce report as part of recruitment strategy for next training day.” (Social Inclusion Trainer (LEA Officers)
“Review my changing role (working with Remodelling Group, September 03) with SMT to clarify my areas of work and to maybe keep a strategic CPD element and also attachment to the ELS networked learning community. Continue to work and develop our ‘big picture’ mentoring map in the LEA and put peer support at the heart of the CPD development in this area. Continue to make distinction between encouragement learning/accountability and assessment. Processes – change NQT and EPD welcome pack for September 03; update training for LEA advisers; reflect and integrate into the Remodelling Agenda.” (CPD Advisor/R&R School Improvement Adviser)