Transcript Copywrite CUREE ltd 2011 All rights reserved

Issues and challenges in linking CPD to
learner outcomes:
Lessons from the field
Philippa Cordingley
CUREE
Background and methodology
• TDA national CPD database launched in 2009 • Over 300 registered providers – including Masters provision
• CUREE observed 75 – different types of provision, provider, focus and
target audience
• Evaluation rooted in TDA Code of Practice for CPD providers and
evidence base
• Benchmarks developed for 4 key areas of the Code
• Evaluation methods:
–
–
–
–
–
–
analysis of the documentary evidence
interviews with key individuals
participant feedback
observation of a typical CPD event
analysis against benchmarks
validation
Benchmarks
• Key areas
–
–
–
–
collaborative and sustained CPD
help improve outcomes for children and young people
based on effective needs analysis
encourage participants to be reflective practitioners
• Goal descriptors – 4 levels
–
–
–
–
informing
influencing
embedding
transforming
Benchmark - Encouraging reflection to inform judgements
1) underpinning rationale/theory
Informing
Influencing
Embedding
transforming
2) current own practice, skills, etc
Provide informal opportunities for
participants to share their current
practice in relation to the focus of
the CPD
3) application in own context
Invite participants to consider
when and how they might use the
focus of the CPD in their own
context and/or the implications of
new information for practice
Introduce (elements of) the Ask participants to review their
Support participants to consider
underlying rationale/theory current practice and exchange the how they might use/integrate the
for the practice that is the
existing knowledge and beliefs
new practices and how they are
focus of the CPD
underpinning this
similar to and different from
existing ones
Encourage reflection on the Plan activities to help participants Encourage participants to identify
underlying rationale/theory explore during the session their
risks and barriers that might
for the practice that is the
knowledge and beliefs and reflect influence their choices about how
focus of the CPD
upon their context, their
to apply their learning
aspirations and practice
Support participants to
Explicitly introduce tools and skills Support participants to plan for
explore and understand the to help participants review and
implementing changes to their
underpinning theory and its reflect critically on their practice, practice and for their continuing
application for a range of/or their knowledge and beliefs, and evaluation and refinement as they
in particular, contexts
their aspirations in relation to the interpret and apply what they
CPD focus
have learned
Practice against goal descriptor - reflection
What would ‘Transforming’ look like?
informing
influencing
embedding
transforming
Provide informal opportunities for
participants to share their current
practice in relation to the focus of the
CPD
Ask participants to review their current
practice and exchange the existing
knowledge and beliefs underpinning
this
The facilitator asked the participants to discuss their own experiences and
practice whilst undertaking the practical experiments at the workshops and
also during the break between workshops.
Throughout the day, the facilitator prompted participants to articulate their
practice (e.g. use of living graphs, enquiries or mystery games), reinforcing
existing good practice and providing an opportunity for less experienced
practitioners to listen to new ideas and approaches.
During one of the activities the participants were invited to articulate their
professional values, such as their philosophy for geography, what they were
doing [teaching] it for; what can geography contribute to in terms of
student development.
Plan activities to help participants
Participants worked together to decide strategies for building the shapes,
explore during the session their
drawing on their own knowledge and how they thought their pupils would
knowledge and beliefs and reflect upon approach the task. They discussed the strategies they used and the
their context, their aspirations and
difficulties they thought their pupils might encounter. They also wrote their
practice
reflections on their own learning, the main mathematical and procedural
features, and how the pupils might respond.
Explicitly introduce tools and skills to
help participants review and reflect
critically on their practice, their
knowledge and beliefs, and their
aspirations in relation to the CPD focus
Four key areas: overview of findings
• In nearly all cases the four elements (collaboration,
reflection, needs analysis and helping improve
outcomes for children) featured in some form
• Most provision tended to be informing or
influencing
• Reflection was the area in which we observed
‘embedding’ and ‘transforming’ provision most
frequently
• Needs analysis – was least frequently embedding
or transforming
Helping improve outcomes for CYP- findings from
evaluating 75 CPD providers
• This area was:
• ‘not observed’ in 1% of
provision
• Just under half of provision
(48%) was ‘informing’
• 41% - at ‘influencing’
• 9% - at ‘embedding’
• None – at transforming
Longer course=deeper engagement and
higher impact?
• On the whole, there needed to be multiple days for
provision to be embedding or transforming
• But:
– over a third of provision lasting 8 days or more – at
informing level
– half a day or less sessions – could be influencing or even
embedding
What did in-school provision look like?
• Often CPD practice observed in school differed little
from out of school provision
• Some distinguishing features:
– Facilitators able to model practice with participants’ own
learners
– Reflection closely linked to the participants classroom
practice
– On-going collaboration and facilitators being able to
respond to emerging needs
– CPD for individuals informed by school strategic objectives
How did providers link participant learning and pupil
outcomes?
Facilitator emphasising how the CPD activity could impact on students’ learning and/or outcome via
•
Questioning and discussion
In one example, the course leader guided participant discussions through questions such as ‘How
could you use this strategy with an SEN kid at KS2?’
•
Case studies and examples of pupil achievements
A provider used examples of work completed by pupils he had worked with, showing progress over
time, to highlight how applying the knowledge and skills introduced at the session could help
improve the participants’ practice and their learner outcomes.
•
Specific activities encouraging participants to consider their pupils’ starting points during their
professional development
During the session, the participants were encouraged to list their generic and specific (e.g. get rid of
the chewing gum) expectations of their pupils. They were then asked to narrow their lists down to
three items ‘that really matter’ to them. Following a general input from the facilitator on what
behaviour strategies were, the participants used the list to come up with their own examples of each
type of strategy that would help them achieve what they hoped for in terms of their pupils’
behaviour.
How did providers link the content and delivery
methods of CPD with learner outcomes?
•
Deepening participants’ knowledge of possible student misconceptions and
misunderstandings
The facilitator provided an example of what might happen if pupils don’t know why they are doing
something to help participants understand that by making assessment obvious to learners they can
achieve better outcomes.
•
Practicing subject-related skills
In one example, the majority of the day was spent undertaking practical activities, so that participants
could learn how to do basic circuits, for example, attaching LED lights in parallel, soft switches and
using fibre optics, in order for them to teach the same skills to their pupils. The facilitator gave tips for
introducing these to their pupils.
•
Enabling participants to make changes to students’ learning by equipping them with
relevant strategies and tools
The facilitator emphasised the value of asking pupils open questions to stretch learning. For example,
he provided participants with questions they might give their own learners to encourage them to think
about how to set up an investigation. Participants considered questions such as: ‘Can plants live
without water?’ ‘Why does it rain?’ and described the sorts of experiments they might develop. The
facilitator also introduced learning frameworks for students, such as a simple table for setting up an
experiment.
How did providers support participants to assess the impact
of CPD through to learner outcomes?
• Not observed in 50% of provision
• Provider visits and observations of participants’ practice
One tutor consistently asked participants to plan to apply their learning about pupil assessment in
practice. In follow up moderation visits teachers and tutor reflect upon the impact of the CPD – if
assessments are moderated as accurate, then the CPD will have been successful. The moderator
also comments on the procedure for assessment at the visits, ensuring that they reflect the aims
of the CPD which was to enhance pupil experiences of school.
• Collecting evidence of pupil learning in portfolios
The participants assembled different types of evidence about their learning in their portfolio. The
tutor explicitly recommended to one of the participants to include evidence of pupil learning and
work (when they experiment with their practice) as a way of tracking and evaluating their
professional development.
• Evaluation forms and other tools
In the evaluation forms completed in the day, the participants had to think about the effect the
training was likely to have on 1) the participants’ practice; 2) their pupils’ behaviour; 3) their
mentoring and support
‘Memos to ourselves’ completed on the day had a section ‘How do we know we have been
successful’
Implications for schools
• The majority of provision was at informing/influencing
end of the spectrum.
What are you current arrangements for assessing the
depth of learning the CPD you buy will provide you/your
colleagues? You might, e.g. probe providers on the
content of provision and the learning processes.
• Providers tended to promote collaboration during the
session rather than beyond it.
To what extent do you currently rely on/expect providers
to arrange collaborative learning once colleagues are
back in the workplace? Do you make arrangements
yourself which could tessellate with collaborative
activities on courses?
Implications for schools(cont)
• Needs analysis was an underdeveloped area of provision
– providers felt that the onus was on schools and
participants to select provision according to their needs.
What links do you currently make between staff
development needs and the selection process for CPD?
Are you explicit about where CPD matches needs
identified in e.g. performance review?
• Understanding the rationale and/or underlying theory
for a particular practice helps practitioners adapt and
embed practice.
To what extent do your colleagues return from CPD
sessions able to explain the theory/underlying rationale
for the practice they have been introduced to?
References
• CUREE (forthcoming) Evaluation of CPD
providers in England 2010-2011: Report for
providers. Manchester: TDA
• CUREE (forthcoming) Evaluation of CPD
providers in England 2010-2011: Report for
schools. Manchester: TDA
• CUREE (forthcoming) Evaluation of providers
on the TDA CPD database – Report for TDA.
Manchester: TDA
Contact Details
[email protected]
www.curee.co.uk
Centre for the Use of Research and Evidence in
Education
4 Copthall House
Station Square
Coventry CV1 2FL
024 7652 4036