A gap in the literature, and implications for further research

Within this section of the chapter, I will highlight a number of gaps in the research literature in relation to developing an understanding of the impacts of teachers’

CPD, and I will highlight the opportunities for further research that this presents to me. One of the key overarching themes to emerge is that there is a significant gap in the literature in relation to understanding the longer-term impacts of short CPD workshops.

In earlier sections of this chapter I established that the process of implementing changes to classroom practices is a conscious and purposeful effort on behalf of

89 teachers, and one that requires teachers investing their time in this process. Yet research can often focus on the immediate effects on classroom practices, and so changes that are more adaptive and evolutionary occurring over much longer and extended time periods may remain undetected. I would therefore suggest that there is always a need to explore the longer term effects of CPD endeavours.

A number of potential limitations in previous research into professional

development have made them inadequate and ineffective (Todnem and Warner, 1994). This point is particularly true, I would suggest, in terms of the needs of establishing the impact of one-day CPD workshops over time. Often evaluations are too shallow, completed on the day of the CPD itself and simply measure teachers’ initial reactions to the CPD workshop. Teachers’ positive reactions to the workshop can result in positive claims of the CPD effectiveness, with little attention given to impacts on teachers’ professional learning, classroom practice, or pupils’

learning. Occasionally, evaluations of CPD workshops will simply provide an account of the actual activities completed by teachers, with little insight at all to teachers’ views, attitudes or beliefs:

‘We need better understanding about the effects of professional

development at various levels, the conditions and processes that lead to success, as well as information about possible unanticipated outcomes. We cannot be satisfied with tapping only participants’ initial reactions to a

professional development experience or activity’ (Guskey, 2000).

Another limitation is that CPD research studies are often carried out too soon after the CPD event. I consider this to be a major shortcoming as changes to classroom practices require time for adaptation, adjustment, and refinement of strategies and

90 approaches. Therefore, it is important to gather information of changes and impact over longer periods of time, as was clearly the case in Constable and Furlong’s (1991) two-year long evaluation of a short subject specific course. When changes in teaching approaches are involved, teachers almost always gain better results the second year of the implementation than they do the first (Guskey, 2000). The first year is often time of experimentation. In the second year, efforts are typically more refined and efficient (Guskey, 2000). The dynamics of the teacher change environment as outlined by Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002), and Guskey (2000) can have a strong bearing on the impact of any CPD episode.

In order to ensure that research into the impact of professional development is truly enlightening and meaningful, I suggest that it must explore teachers’

motivations and capacities to make changes to their teaching practices within their school environments.

Guskey’s (2000) model of classroom impact suggests that changes in practice are often small and incremental. In addition, Clarke and Hollingsworth’s (2002) model of teacher growth suggest iterative cycles of enactment (of practices) and

reflection upon them can lead to changes over time. It would argue that it is not just possible, but probable, that longer-term changes to teaching practices remain undocumented. If short subject specific courses can lead to impact then the conditions supporting this impact will be of interest, particularly as much research suggests that impact following such short CPD endeavours is highly unlikely.

91 Research studies exploring the impact of short subject specific CPD courses

remain largely absent from the published literature, as are studies investigating the impact of short episodes of CPD over time. My research study will seek to add to this research area by exploring the longer-term impacts on teachers as a result of engaging with short episodes of CPD. With such little research documenting the longer term impact of short one-day courses, this study will generate research findings which are likely to be particularly timely considering the recent introduction of the DfE (2016) standard for teachers’ professional development. Additionally, the most current Ofsted framework requires school leaders to ‘ensure that all teaching staff benefit from appropriate professional development and that performance is rigorously managed’ (2012, p. 5).

A key area of attention within my research study is that changes to classroom practices may lead to minor improvements in the short term, which cumulate in larger effects over time. In the short-term changes to practices may not be easily discernible or detectable yet become more visible over time. Studies into CPD impacts are often too shallow and too brief, and rarely look for longer term, or the unintended impacts.

Within the course of my professional experience within the field of teacher education I have realised that changes to practices following a CPD workshop may not be immediate. Changes can occur many months after teachers have engaged with the CPD. Guskey’s (2000) findings make the same point that

change to practice is not always easy, immediate, or automatic but a much

longer-92 term process that may not be detected immediately after a CPD course. This is a point that is not always reflected in research studies.

Barriers and challenges to implementation are an important consideration. Barriers are likely to effect the timeline over which changes to practices occur. Robinson and Sebba (2004) identified lack of time as the most commonly reported barrier to implementation of new practices. Support offered from the school management team and colleagues are also major factors in whether change was implemented (Lydon and King, 2009). Arguably, working under competing demands and commitments is likely to require a certain level of determination on the part of teachers to implement any change to teaching practices.

Fullan (1993) in addition to Guskey (2000) also found that implementing

professional development and making changes to classroom practices often takes more time than expected (op cit). It has been recognised that teachers may

acquire new teaching strategies, but it may take years to integrate these into the classroom (Fullan, 1993, Chance and Chance, 2001). Changes in teaching practices tend to be gradual, radical changes to teaching practices rarely occur (Guskey, 2002). Findings from a study Grove et al (2009) into the impact of professional development suggested that changes to teachers’ practices were often subtle, and that these small and subtle changes to practices indicated that that teachers were carefully considering the changes they make. Changes to practices may take place over a number of years and will therefore be missed by research studies which take place soon or shortly after a CPD workshop taking place.

93 It has been noticeable that the vast majority of studies into the effectiveness of CPD, occur within six months of the CPD workshop, so important changes to practice may well be missed. My study will explore the impacts on teaching practices up to a period of five years after the CPD workshop. Findings are therefore likely to make a valuable contribution to the research literature. The absence of research seeking to report the longer-term effects of CPD is surprising considering the claims of Fullan (1993), Guskey (2002), Burchell et al (2002), that impacts can continue developing over time.

Implications for study design

Following my review of the literature a number of implications have emerged which will influence my study design.

Within recent studies of the impact of CPD endeavours, Guskey’s (2000) five-stage impact model is often utilised as a framework for analysis, and this is a model that will be important within the data collection phases of this study. The utility of this approach is that it proposes a distinct five-stage model. Level one concerns establishing participants’ initial reactions to the CPD event. Many

evaluations of CPD begin and end at this stage. But, my study will give attention to all five levels of analysis. The second level of analysis examines participants’

learning as a result of engaging with the CPD. The third level of analysis identifies changes to participants’ practices. The fourth level of analysis includes an

94 examination of the organisational support and change that participants’

experience. The fifth and final level of analysis includes a consideration of the impact on pupils’ learning. Since its inception, Guskey’s framework (ibid) has been widely used to provide information of the impact of CPD at all levels. The levels of analysis will provide a useful framework for data collection within this study, as the intended purposes of the one-day CPD workshops aim to positively affect

participants, which in turn, it is assumed, will result in enhanced learning

experiences for pupils. It is for this reason that Guskey’s framework (ibid) for CPD evaluation will guide the collection and the initial analysis of data in relation to Research Question 1: Establishing the extent of impact of a one-day science subject specific CPD workshop on teachers’ practices.

However, Guskey’s framework (2000) alone will not be sufficient to structure evidence and frame conclusions in relation to Research Question 2: Establishing the conditions which influence the change process. The ways in which teachers conceptualise and describe change will be an important area to explore within this study, and so appropriate methods of collecting and suitable strategies to analyse teachers’ perspectives will need to be considered. Powell and Terrell (2003), make the point that impacts at the personal professional level are rarely considered.

Instead policy can assume an unproblematic direct link between teacher

engagement with CPD and impact on pupils’ learning. They make the case that:

‘This positivist stance reflects a restricted representation of the complexities inherent in the interplay between teaching and learning. This apparently

95 neat and tidy, cause and effect relationship ought to be treated sceptically.

It suggests a simplistic conceptualisation of teaching as a technical-rational pursuit’. (Powell and Terrell, 2003, p. 391).

Their study demonstrates that teachers’ perceptions of impacts are important considerations within the change process. This will be a point reflected within the design of my study. In addition, I fully concur with Davies and Preston’s (2002) view that establishing the impact of CPD is a much more complex process than simply identifying gains in pupils’ achievement. Within the context of my study I will also need to be mindful of Fung’s (2000) view that teachers’ personal, professional and social contexts have a strong bearing on the change process, and that

teachers construct change, rather than transmit it. That is to say, change is a very personal process. Teachers’ professional judgement and decision making are important components of the change process (Grove 2008). Teachers are affected by and influenced by pervasive educational cultures and policy, and this in turn influences the extent to which they enact change.

Agency to generate classroom change emerges through teachers’ interaction with their environment (Priestley et al., 2015). In order to establish the conditions which may be most salient to bring about changes to teaching practices within the

context of this study with a focus on short subject specific CPD, it will be important to consider the significance of Clarke and Hollingsworth’s (2002) Interconnected Model of Teacher Growth (see Figure 2) .

96 This model makes clear the distinction between the internal ‘personal domain’ of the teacher, and the ‘external domain’. The model highlights interactions between these domains, and the influence of ‘salient outcomes’, which will influence and frame teachers’ enactment of pedagogy, and their subsequent reflection upon this.

Clarke and Hollingsworth’s model (ibid) will be revisited in subsequent sections as an initial framework for interpreting this study’s findings, particularly in relation to understanding how and why teachers interact with their educational contexts, in the way they do, to enact change.

The need to capture the personal, social and political influences of classroom change will therefore be reflected in my study design, and discussed more fully in Chapter 3.

2.10 Conclusion

Within this chapter, I have reviewed existing research to strive to establish the extent of understanding of the likely impacts of CPD, and the factors influencing its effectiveness. Longer term studies in relation to short CPD workshops appear to be underrepresented, as too do studies exploring the interactions of CPD

participants with the wider educational environments, in order to gain detailed explanations of impacts.

97 The discourse on effective CPD has tended to focus on the components and

structure to the CPD course itself and makes little reference to the participants’

personal resources. However, only teachers can mediate changes to their classroom practices. Teachers will filter and amplify the intended objectives of CPD and in turn, potentially affect, change, and become benefactors of the CPD as a result of engaging with it. Teachers alone implement changes to practices with their own classrooms and this requires them to draw on their professional judgement. Professional judgement is likely to be influenced by teachers own attitudes, values, motivations, beliefs, experiences, competencies and

expectations.

In order to acknowledge the instrumental role of the teacher in the change

process, Self-Determination Theory, and Teacher Agency have been considered as important frameworks for reaching an understanding of how and why teachers engage with CPD and implement subsequent changes to practice. My research study will therefore seek to explore the nature and extent of changes to teaching practices over time and the key conditions that have a bearing on these changes.

In the next chapter, I will set out the rationale for a sequential mixed-methods approach that will seek to answer the specific research questions of this study.

98