The term ‘Professional Development’ is one of many terms used in the context of teacher professional learning and their meaning is not always clear. In this work, I have used the term Continuing Professional development or CPD as meaning professional development which directly aims to improve specific pupil outcomes. This contrasts with indirect CPD where links to pupil outcomes are less clearly defined such as leadership development, training in operational matters or attending conferences to increase awareness of the latest ideas. (Department for Education, 2016a, p. 5).
In their report into the world’s best performing school systems, Barber & Mourshed (2007, p.15, see also p.26) make explicit that ‘the quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers’, and requires school systems to have effective teacher selection processes supported by a package of CPD which focuses on improved classroom instruction. There is increasing and strong evidence for the impact of CPD on professional learning and the link to improved outcomes for pupils. This typically involves a careful focus on classroom practice though professional dialogue and collaboration, and the use of research evidence to inform practice. Professional learning is further enhanced by using external networks which offer broader support and further practical suggestions. to practitioners, thus giving greater opportunities for professional learning (Pedder & Opfer, 2011, pp. 741-758). External providers can also provide ‘multiple and diverse perspectives, and challenge orthodoxies within the school’ and when used most successfully, they engage in coaching and mentoring relationships, which then enable teacher leadership (Cordingley, et al., 2015, p. 24). Effective CPD should also incorporate pupil-voice in evaluating the impact of a chosen classroom practice. Not only does this keep the focus on the impact on pupil learning but the process itself can be highly motivating. We return to the importance of a climate of trust. In this specific context teachers can challenge their own pre-conceptions about pupil learning and compare this with pupils to show they have actually understood. This, in turn, enables deeper professional learning to take place (Nelson, et al., 2015, pp. 30-55).
Best-practice in school leadership of CPD is shown in helping colleagues to understand the place of the CPD activities in the wider school priorities. These leaders also set high expectations to enable a ‘challenging learning culture and promote ‘evidence-informed, self- regulated learning’ whilst distributing leadership so that different teachers can lead on particular aspects of CPD (Cordingley, et al., 2015, p. 29).
CPD has the most positive impact on pupil outcomes when it happens over a more extended period (Cordingley & Bell, 2012, p. 4). The meta-research by Cordingley, et al. (2015, pp.12,13,15), of nearly one thousand international reviews since 2000, made a significant contribution to shaping the Standards for teachers’ professional development (Department for Education, 2016a) and defined the duration of this extended period pragmatically as being at least two school terms and more often a year or more, rather than shorter, one session activities. They also suggested ‘rhythm’ to the structure of CPD activities. After the initial input, there should be experimentation accompanied by peer collaboration before follow-up, consolidation and support activities. This enables teachers’ understanding to be considered in the light of research knowledge whilst also giving the opportunity to implement the suggested practice in the classroom.
CPD which focuses on subject-specific CPD provision is also seen to deliver most benefit in achieving high pupil outcomes (Whitehouse, 2011, p. 1), by focusing on developing expertise in subject knowledge, subject-specific pedagogy and by encouraging an understanding of how pupils make progress. This, in turn, should be complemented by CPD which focuses on formative assessment so that teachers can understand the impact of their work on pupils progress (Cordingley, et al., 2015, p. 20).
Peer-based approaches such as collaborative enquiry, coaching and mentoring are powerful ways of providing CPD because they help to instil confidence in participants in order to take the calculated risks required when engaging in this form of professional learning (Cordingley & Bell, 2012, p. 4). Peer- coaching, as an example, enables reciprocal, mutual support as colleagues model practice, observe each other and engage in reflective pedagogical dialogue. Its success is based on a feeling of mutuality. To be most impactful it has to be supported by school leaders recognising its importance and providing sufficient time for engagement. (Devine, et al., 2013, p. 1384, noting also the work of Cornett and Knight, 2009 and others and Fullan and Knight, 2011). Taking this point further, if schools are to provide meaningful and powerful CPD of the level and complexity being suggested, they must have effective planning and support systems in place (Whitehouse, 2011, p. 11).
This way of developing shared, pedagogical learning can be formalised by using the term
Leadership. Whilst there is no one definition, the suggested characteristics, as described above, include teachers working together in collaborative groups, reflecting and interrogating practice with the focus on group learning (Stoll, et al., 2006b, pp. 222-227). In enabling teachers to share expertise, build knowledge, problem- solve and innovate together, the PLC provides a ‘critical leverage points for profound change in school cultures…’ (Whitford & Wood, 2010, p. 1). PLCs can support a research-engaged approach (Dimmock, 2012, p. 115) and can be used to describe the peer-coaching activities, outlined above, as reflective professional enquiry in the form of dialogue, joint planning and peer observations. The collaboration in PLCs aims to develop both a deeper perspective and trust between colleagues as part of the school’s professional culture and should be seen as the ‘way we do things here’ rather than being an adjunct to teachers’ core work (Stoll, 2011, pp. 105-106). This is further enhanced by a sense of mutual accountability for classroom practice (Whitford & Wood, 2010, pp. 17-18). However, an overly narrow focus on pupil outcomes, as part of a high accountability education system, can impact detrimentally on the ‘diversity, creativity and adaptability’ which are important to the success of PLCs (Watson, 2014, p. 27).
The success of the PLC also depends on the use of skilled coaches, who understand the process of inquiry, enable members to take fuller responsibility for their own learning, and have the knowledge of the range of activities that would lead to changes in classroom practice. Best- practice is also supported by having protocols to guide professional discourse in the direction of professional learning by enabling insights to be connected to a broader line of enquiry (Yendol- Hoppey, 2010, pp. 78-80, 83-84).