How to deepen professional learning to increase the potential for success

Professional Development Today Volume 13.3 (pre-print) How to deepen professional learning to increase the potential for success We are on the journey of shifting from traditional models of professional development (PD) to more innovative approaches that explore and embed effective practices that make a real difference to adults and to children. This is of particular relevance as we seek effective ways to develop specialist or subject knowledge and skills and move more to models of in-house PD and school-toschool support for development. Earley and Porritt (2009) identify nine factors that have the potential to increase the success of any professional learning opportunity and these are highlighted in the first article in this issue of PDT. Consideration of the interrelationship of these factors enabled colleagues from a primary school and an HEI to be collaborative and innovative in designing a different approach to professional learning and development. How to establish clarity of purpose and ownership of professional development at the beginning Understanding context and needs is crucial before any planning and designing of professional development takes place. Glebe Primary School is a mixed community school serving a culturally diverse community in Harrow in north London. Almost all pupils are from homes where English is not the first language and the number of pupils with special educational needs and / or disabilities is above the national average. Its Ofsted report (2009) described it as an outstanding school that is highly inclusive: At the heart of the school is a real commitment to ensure that every individual really matters. In April 2009, the school was designated as a Knowledge Centre for Cross- Cultural Communication and Language Learning. Funded by London Challenge, this designation requires the school to share its good practice with other London schools. In order for colleagues in Glebe to be able to provide the most effective school - to - school support, both the head (Donna Barrett) and deputy head (Martine Clarke) wanted to further develop the school s own leading edge practice in: the induction of newly arrived pupils the assessment of English language learning needs and pupils progress in English developing programmes of support and resources to accelerate pupils acquisition of English closing the attainment gap for EAL learners

promoting cross-cultural communication, language learning and community cohesion through the development of curriculum based projects and extended school provision which meet the needs of pupils, their families and the wider community. Donna approached the Institute of Education (IOE) knowing the expertise in oracy and literacy of Dr Cathie Wallace and Roger West and the work on impact evaluation that Vivienne Porritt and the Strategic Professional Development team at the London Centre for Leadership in Learning (LCLL) have developed with schools since 2005. Donna wanted to collaborate with the IOE to design a bespoke programme of professional development to develop the school s leading edge practice and support colleagues at Glebe to devise effective ways to support other schools as a Knowledge centre. Initial design meetings were held between senior leaders from Glebe and IOE colleagues. These sessions enabled the collaborative group to explore and identify the specific needs of the school and to begin to establish clarity about the anticipated overarching outcomes for adults and children. An approach to the learning was agreed that would ensure: professional development activity would build on the existing knowledge, skills and expertise already in the school all staff would engage in further learning to develop the teaching of oracy / literacy dedicated time was allocated to enable colleagues to reflect on and identify their new learning about teaching of oracy and literacy and facilitated dialogue would identify what needed to be different about their practice as a result time to explore and embed their changed practice time to explore what colleagues were learning about their learning in order to be able to replicate it both in Glebe and with other schools The final design resulted in staff at Glebe participating in three half day and three twilight sessions between February and July 2010. Sessions were included in closure days and after school meetings, were at Glebe and facilitated by Dr Catherine Wallace and Roger West. A range of theories, research and case studies relating to children s oracy and literacy development were studied and their implications for improving teaching and learning in the classroom examined. A core group of seven key members of Glebe staff also participated in three additional twilight sessions at the IOE. The first core group session explored the following questions to make tangible the purpose of the project within the defined time scale: Question What is our core purpose? Answer We can make a difference to children s learning.

What is our vision for the teaching and learning of literacy at Glebe School? What do we want to achieve for our children? That pupils literacy learning is embedded in overall cultural learning. That all children can be literate in English and will engage with adults about their learning. This gave the group the opportunity to explore how they could support colleagues to: reflect and share the new learning between the specialist sessions apply and embed new practice in classrooms, and disseminate this to practitioners in other schools through the Knowledge Centre This is a radical shift in practice as too often, schools embark on a whole school development programme without designing and planning for the much needed follow up for colleagues to discuss and reflect on what they have learnt. (Ofsted 2010). Time was given to design and implement both the professional learning stage and the professional development stage. In the professional learning stage, the planning group determined why, how and what colleagues would learn and the professional development stage considered ways in which colleagues at Glebe would reflect on their learning, be supported to take risks, trial and refine practices and to work with peers to evaluate the difference they achieved. Key learning points for Glebe were: the need to be clear about what kind of the difference they wanted to make and for whom before designing professional learning and development being realistic about what would be achieved in six months the importance of involving colleagues in identifying needs, reflecting on their own learning and supporting colleagues to develop and innovate as a consequence How to plan for the impact of professional development at the beginning The approach to impact evaluation that Porritt has been exploring since 2005 builds on the work of Dr Thomas Guskey (2005) who tells us that evaluating impact is not difficult if we spend time establishing clarity about the impact we want to achieve before engaging in sustained CPD activity (Earley and Porritt, 2009). At LCLL, we have further developed the crucial significance of knowing the starting position, the baseline to determine what impact is possible in a given timeframe.

The core group was thus supported at the outset by Carol Taylor and Vivienne Porritt to identify baseline practice and desired impact. Evidence to support these positions included both the quantitative (hard) data of pupil attainment and qualitative (soft) data around the core values explored in the initial scoping sessions, those of pupil and family engagement and behaviours. Current adult practices in Glebe in terms of expertise, practice and behaviours were also analysed. Colleagues at Glebe learned that achieving absolute clarity is difficult! and that the typically broad aims stated at the beginning of previous developments made it hard to determine strategy and provide evidence of changed practice. They realised they needed further clarity about the baseline of both adult practices and pupil learning and returned to Glebe to enquire further with colleagues to determine a concrete baseline. Consequently, the Core Group recognised that in order for newly arrived pupils to make more rapid progress, the school needed to incorporate a wider range of approaches into its practice. In February 2010, colleagues began by implementing new strategies with 12 pupils from Reception to Year 7, who had arrived at the school in the Autumn Term 2009 and were in the initial stages of their English language acquisition. These new strategies included: compiling a detailed literacy and language profile for each pupil which also involved regular consultation with families, developing a more rigorous and systematic assessment procedure for gathering baseline pupil data and measuring progress in speaking and listening, reading and writing, recording, analysing and monitoring pupils behaviour for learning, providing regular opportunities for these learners to participate in collaborative learning activities, engaging pupils in creative and inclusive activities centred on whole texts, developing a system for teachers and adults supporting learning to evaluate and improve their professional practices. Involving all colleagues in the professional learning stage enabled Glebe to support colleagues individual learning needs and deepen their knowledge in relation to language acquisition and literacy development. In the professional development stage, supportive and sustainable classroom practices emerged including peer observation and a greater sharing of strategies that could be replicated and consequently improved learning outcomes for pupils. Key learning points for Glebe were: the significance of being clear at the outset what difference professional development will make and for whom the need to drill down further into what is working and what can be improved and the evidence that tells you this ensure that other colleagues understand why this enquiry process is happening and the importance of this approach

How to ensure time for reflection and feedback The three facilitated core group sessions gave the team time and space to reflect. Whilst this may be considered a luxury in the context of the highly pressured life of a school, it was in fact crucial in supporting the core team to lead the project strategically, re-visit goals, explore challenges as well as identify success in order to celebrate this and keep colleagues engaged and motivated. It was also a time to reflect on what they had learned and how they were sharing and developing that learning. Throughout this project the LCLL team were exploring the concept of learning about everyone s learning, drawing on the thinking of Noneka and Takeuchi (1995). We explored the importance of creating opportunities for colleagues to articulate and make explicit their new knowledge, of converting learning into new practice and identifying what it is that is making a difference and then sharing this new knowledge and practice across the group or organisation. For example, the core group explored the following questions and answers Question What have we learned in the two sessions led by Dr Wallace about the learning and teaching of literacy? Answer The importance of how we initially assess our learners and use that information. That we need to focus on bilingual learners and the linguistic resources that they come with on what they know rather than on what they do not know. Whilst the core group found the reflection sessions to be both challenging and rigorous, they also offered an excellent opportunity for in depth reflection, to identify strategies to ensure progress and success and to discuss the strategic development of the school. In particular, these reflective discussions enabled the core group to gain clarity over the direction of the work which: enabled us to innovate, replicate, and disseminate strategies - and then to celebrate! Key learning points for Glebe were: the importance of following up on a professional learning opportunity supporting colleagues to reflect on their new learning and identify implications for their practice sharing and celebrating what is working

Impact The significant innovation which led to improved practice was to establish clarity of the baseline picture and expected impact at the start of the project: it was then significantly easier to evaluate the impact at the end of the project than had been expected. In terms of quantitative data, pupils at Glebe are expected to make two sub levels of progress in a school year, therefore pupils would be expected to make at least 1 sub level of progress within the project time frame. The assessment data shows that these expectations were significantly exceeded in all but two cases. The 12 newly arrived pupils and EAL learners identified at the outset of the project made significant progress in speaking and listening, reading and writing between February and July 2010. Table 1: impact on attainment Pupil Year Group Home Language National Curriculum Sub Levels of Progress Made in Speaking and Listening National Curriculum Sub Levels of Progress Made in Reading National Curriculum Sub Levels of Progress Made in Writing 1 Reception Tamil 2 3 3 2 Reception Urdu 3 3 3 3 Year 1 Romanian 3 2 2 4 Year 1 Arabic 2 1 1 5 Year 2 Romanian 5 2 2 6 Year 4 Romanian 5 0 5 7 Year 4 Tamil / French 2 1 2 8 Year 6 Romanian 10 4 4 9 Year 6 Romanian 8 4 4 10 Year 7 Romanian 8 10 9 11 Year 7 Pashtu / Finnish 7 7 8 12 Year 7 Pashtu / German 8 4 3 Other aims included how expertise would be shared across the organisation at leadership level, with whole staff, across faculty teams, through on-going dialogue. When asked what they were doing differently as a result of the project, the response from the core group was: making time for a reflective, learningcommunity dialogue, and for teams to share their work in planned and structured time. How to ensure strategic leadership of professional development Figure 1: 3D approach to strategic leadership of professional development

The innovative 3D approach that we were exploring in this project, i.e., collaboration between existing school expertise, external subject expertise and professional learning expertise within a three tiered structure, enabled us to meet the identified specific needs of the school. In addition, it enabled the school to refine their approach to adult learning within their own organisation and, as a Knowledge Centre, to identify how better to support the learning of others. In particular, the design of effective professional learning opportunities which were followed up and supported so that development occurred both achieved and exceeded the desired impact. This model of in-house professional development was highly effective and good value for money because it had a direct impact on teachers practice and pupils learning. Carol Taylor, Donna Barrett and Martine Clarke (Glebe School) Carol Taylor: Programme Leader for Strategic Professional Development, London Centre for Leadership in Learning, Institute of Education c.taylor@ioe.ac.uk References Earley, P, and Porritt, V (eds) (2009) Effective Practices in Continuing Professional Development: Lessons from schools, London: Institute of Education Nonaka, I and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press Ofsted (2010) Good professional development in schools: How does leadership contribute? London: Ofsted