Several programme design models have been discussed in literature (van den Akker, 1999; van den Akker et al., 2006; Bannan-Ritland, 2003; Gravemeijer & Cobb, 2006; Lijnse, 1995; Richey & Klein, 2007). Reeves’s (2006) design was found to be informative when I first started this study. All four stages highlighted in Figure 3.1 were adopted at the outset of the project, starting with a needs analysis stage, followed by three cycles of AR and a final reflection stage. However, there was an overlap between both stage two and stage three below. The distinction
between development and refinement was not always fine-grained. Although several new workshops for the subsequent cycles were developed, the design principles remained the same.
Figure 3.1: Reeves’s design model (2006, p. 59)
Interestingly, several programmes tend to combine stages two and three into one stage. Bannan-Ritland summarised the common stages in the different models of programme design in literature (as cited in Plomp, 2009, p. 15):
1. Preliminary research includes needs and context analysis, review of literature, and development of a framework.
2. Prototyping phase involves an iterative design consisting of microcyclic iterations with formative evaluation. This is the most important research activity aimed at improving and refining the intervention.
3. In the assessment phase, whether the solution or intervention meets the pre- determined specifications is concluded. This phase often results in
recommendations for improvement.
As illustrated in chapter 1, the implementation stage in this study was at the second stage, resembling the prototyping phase mentioned above. The implementation stage employed elements of competence and reflective models of Chediel (2013, pp. 7–9) and blended learning in the third cycle (Tinio, 2010, p. 4) through an online forum, an email list and a mobile WhatsApp group to facilitate networking during the training course. Plomp and Nieveen (2007, p. 20) concluded that a design research results in interventions, such as programs, products, and processes. As noted in the Bannan-Ritland’s summary of design models (as cited in Plomp, 2009, p. 15), an intervention is the most significant part of any model, as it is the ‘core component’ that aims at improving practice.
Identify and problems b practitioners ollabor prototype solutions: informed by principals technology Iterative testing & efinemen
of solutions
3.6.1 Programme design principles
When putting together an intervention design, it is mainly based on the outcomes of the needs analysis stage (see section 5.1). However, it is also important for an effective design to be informed by the findings of past literature. Therefore, to guide my design, I collated several design principles in the first stage. Design principles are discussed usually in ‘educational design research’. According to Plomp and Nieveen (2007), an educational design research is perceived as ‘the systematic study of designing, developing, and evaluating educational interventions’ (p. 9). INSET programmes are one form of ‘educational interventions’ (Plomp & Nieveen, 2007, p. 20). Several studies have provided frameworks and understandings to guide INSET design (Birman et al., 2000; Blandford, 2012; Darling-Hammond,
2012; Darling-Hammond, 2006; Grossman et al., 2009; Howey, 1996; Mann, 2005;
Richards & Farrell, 2005; Warford, 2011).
Common themes characterise effective professional development interventions. Van den Akker et al. (2006, p. 4) reviewed the literature on professional development design and concluded that previous works have discussed five common
characteristics (i.e. interventionist, iterative, process-oriented, utility-oriented, and theory-oriented). Desimone (2009, p. 185) argued that the core features of a successful professional development are ‘a focus on content, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation’. In the United States, the National Staff Development Council ([NSDC], 2011) published a guiding document on teacher professional development design that emphasised nine main characteristics.
Although the aims of these principles are comprehensive, they were useful in the development of the different workshops in my AR intervention as will be discussed in chapter 5. Another helpful guidance in the content design and delivery style of the study intervention was contained in Darling-Hammond et al.’s (2009, pp. 9–11) summary of the main themes observed across the literature on effective professional development. According to their literature review, an effective INSET must be intensive, focused on student learning, aligned with school improvement priorities and builds strong working relationships among teachers.
In addition to the principles discussed above, Table 3.1 summarises the guiding principles, which informed the design of the interventionist cycles in the
implementation stage of this study. The relevant elements of literature are presented into two sub-categories ‘process-related’ and ‘content-related’ principles.
Table 3.1: Programme design principles
Area Principles
Process-related principles Considering the
context
Teachers work in a larger sociocultural context. Understanding the social relationships, norms, and expectations is pivotal for the success of the programme. (Oliver & Dempster, 2003).
‘A higher level of success may be attained through an approach to course design, which draws on participants’ knowledge of the local learning/teaching situation’ (Wolter, 2000, p. 311).
Adaptability McKenney, Nieveen, and van den Akker (2006) referred to the notion of evolutionary planning of professional development, i.e. ‘a planning framework that is responsive to field data and experiences as acceptable moments’ (p. 84).
Engagement Engaging trainee teachers as learners in professional development is a success factor according to Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995). Gulamhussein (2013) argued that teachers’ initial exposure to a concept ‘should engage to increase their buy-in, and so they can participate actively in making sense of a new practice’ (p. 16).
Modelling It is important to provide teachers with demonstrations of teaching strategies to help them grasp a specific strategy and understand its application. Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) demanded access to successful models of practice and ‘provi[sion] of support through modelling, coaching, and the collective solving of problems’ (p. 3).
Reflection Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) argued that trainers must provide ‘opportunities to observe, assess, and reflect on the new practices, and teacher professional development must be ‘grounded in enquiry, reflection, and experimentation’ (p. 2). This concept will be more tangible in the discussion of section 3.6.
Networking Professional development is more effective when it creates collaborative and reflective learning communities. Borko (2004) reported evidence that ‘strong professional learning communities can foster teacher learning and instructional improvement’ (p. 6). Interaction Interaction is pivotal for learning to take place. The lack of
interaction in professional development may lead to boredom and negative attitudes. According to Desimone (2009), active learning and collective participation are among the core features of effective professional development (pp. 183–184). Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) pointed out that effective programs are ‘collaborative and involve the sharing of knowledge’ (p. 2).
Time The shortest period possible is ideal. Hill (2009) argued that too much INSET, in fact, can decrease instructional coherence (p. 472). Previous research has suggested a period of 14 hours or less has no effect on student learning (Wei et al., 2009). Although in this study the period of the first cycle started at 60 hour, this was shortened to 25 hours and a demo lesson in the second cycle, followed by eight blended training sessions and a demo lessons in the last cycle.
Participants’ voice
Understanding participants and their needs is important for program success. The participants are the stakeholders who will implement the programme deliverables. Listening to their voice would provide ‘design directions’ and strengthen their sense of ownership (Wake & Mills, 2014, p. 1024). Reeves (2006) cautioned against the notion of researchers mandating procedures and processes for teachers to implement, ‘Our goal should not be to develop esoteric theoretical knowledge that we think practitioners should apply’ (p. 61). Darling- Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) called for teacher professional development to be ‘participant-driven’ (p. 2).
Content-related principles
Objectives Professional development must be within a framework with ‘defined goals’ that are relevant to trainees’ needs (Desimone, 2009, p. 181).
Objectives must be SMART (i.e. specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound).
Relevance An effective professional development must be relevant to teachers’ practices (McKenney et al., 2006, p. 77). Professional development that exists only to ‘fulfil licensure requirements’ must be abandoned (Hill, 2009, p. 475).
Authentic training activities
McLoughlin and Oliver (2000) called for authentic materials to be used in designing learning interventions. It is important to provide trainees with real-life materials based on their context. This will help them understand training input and contextualise teaching strategies.
Themes Gulamhussein (2013) recommended that ‘[t]he content presented to teachers shouldn’t be generic, but instead specific’ (p. 17).
Respondents of the needs analysis survey and participants of focus groups drew attention to several preferred topics, such as teaching reading, ICT, and student engagement. The training should focus on these topics.
Technology Technology has facilitated our lives in several ways, and education has much benefited from the technological advances. Crow (2010, p. 10) discussed the potential of technology in supporting professional development through sharing resources, knowledge, and experience. Killion (2011) commented that ‘Online professional learning has tremendous potential to expand access to professional development, enhance learning for educators, and produce significant results for educators and their students (p. 17).
The above principles are viewed as good practices for INSET programme design. The purpose of the table above is to anchor each principle in relation to the relevant
literature. However, not all of these literature sources and principles have been discussed and referenced elsewhere in this chapter. The reasons behind this are 1) the design is mainly based on the outcomes of the needs analysis stage and 2) most of these principles were among the emerged themes in the needs analysis and implementation stages.