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 2) current own practice, skills, etc 3) application in own context

Informing Provide informal opportunities for participants to share their current practice in relation to the focus of the CPD

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

Influencing Introduce (elements of) the underlying rationale/theory for the practice that is the focus of the CPD

Ask participants to review their current practice and exchange the existing knowledge and beliefs underpinning this

Support participants to consider how they might use/integrate the new practices and how they are similar to and different from existing ones

Embedding Encourage reflection on the underlying rationale/theory for the practice that is the focus of the CPD

Plan activities to help participants explore during the session their knowledge and beliefs and reflect upon their context, their aspirations and practice

Encourage participants to identify risks and barriers that might influence their choices about how to apply their learning

transforming Support participants to explore and understand the underpinning theory and its application for a range of/or in particular, contexts

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

Support participants to plan for implementing changes to their practice and for their continuing evaluation and refinement as they interpret and apply what they have learned

Practice against goal descriptor - reflectionWhat would ‘Transforming’ look like?

informing Provide informal opportunities for participants to share their current practice in relation to the focus of the CPD

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.

influencing Ask participants to review their current practice and exchange the existing knowledge and beliefs underpinning this

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.

embedding Plan activities to help participants explore during the session their knowledge and beliefs and reflect upon their context, their aspirations and practice

Participants worked together to decide strategies for building the shapes, drawing on their own knowledge and how they thought their pupils would approach the task. They discussed the strategies they used and the difficulties they thought their pupils might encounter. They also wrote their reflections on their own learning, the main mathematical and procedural features, and how the pupils might respond.

transforming 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 misunderstandingsThe 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 skillsIn 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 toolsThe 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 portfoliosThe 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 toolsIn 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

philippa.cordingley@curee.co.uk

www.curee.co.ukCentre for the Use of Research and Evidence in

Education4 Copthall House

Station SquareCoventry CV1 2FL

024 7652 4036