Prof Mark Hadfield. Cardiff University, Wales

Prof Michael Jopling, Northumbria University, England

Connected Educators webinar 27 October 2014

Building capacity for

collaboration between schools

Context

• Long history of school to school collaboration in UK, especially in urban areas.

• Brokered by local authorities (school districts) and other middle tier organizations, rather than universities.

• Often supported by enquiry-based approaches to build capacity and promote professional learning. (Hadfield & Jopling, 2012)

Four interacting elements of networking and collaboration

Purpose - agreed, common focus and shared values

People - agency

Processes - what people are engaged in when they are together.

Structures - help bring people together in the first place.

Mobilisation

• Iterative process starting at micro level

• Leverage support at different levels

• Building on pre-existing relationships,

connections and networks

• Then move to macro level

Processes and structures

Collaborative professional learning

Direction and flow Range of processes How processes underpin professional learning

One school to one school

Mentoring and coaching schemes; research lesson study programmes; peer observation schemes.

Having a network mentor/coach – The mentor can provide new ideas and practice from elsewhere and motivate practitioners to become involved in further learning.

One school to many schools

Programmes of inter-visitations, critical friendships, school based consultants.

Undertaking inter-visitations - A programme of visits to a school which has developed an area of expertise can inspires a groups of staff from other schools to establish their own innovations.

Many schools to one school

Sustained programmes of professional learning or enquiry support delivered by school teams.

Regular teacher researcher meetings –these provided a mixture of support and pressure for novice researchers to complete individual enquiries or innovations.

Many schools to many schools

Network-wide conferences (incl. pupil voice). Cross-phase and theme groups, enquiry groups, subject specialist groups. Network-based enquiry and action research groups.

Network ‘pupil voice’ conference –enthusiasm and positive feedback from pupils involved can inspire teachers in other schools to become more actively involved in the network.

Characteristic of collaborative learning processes• Use external expertise linked to school-based

activity;

• Contain observation and feedback;

• Emphasize peer support rather than leadership by managers;

• Scope for teacher participants to identify their own CPD focus;

• Processes to encourage, extend and structure professional dialogue;

• Sustain the CPD over time to enable teachers to embed the practices in their own classroom settings. (Cordingley et al, 2003)

Discussion 1: enquiry in school

Think about the last 2 or 3 major

collaborative professional learning activities

you have been involved in.

• Which of the characteristics of effective

collaborative professional learning applied

to it?

• How could you have improved the activity?

Processes and structures

Knowledge creation: enquiry

Effective collaborative enquiry

methodologies:

• Action research

• Learning walks

• Lesson study

• Instructional rounds

Enquiry-driven collaborative

improvement

• Involves employing enquiry methodologies for a range of purposes

• For leaders to balance external accountability pressures with a collaborative desire to improve

• For curriculum innovation and pedagogical development to become processes of collaborative enquiry

• For teachers to explore their own and one another's practice

Transfer of practice

Enquiry into Practice Enquiry into Practice

Replication Adaptation Re-creation

Fidelity

Collaborative enquiry andcultural change

• When a classroom observation becomes an act of collaborative enquiry, rather than a monitoring activity, the dynamic changes from proving to improving. So does the opportunity it creates to move practice forward.

• When practitioners and school leaders meet to explore the data generated for a pupil progress meeting, it could be a process of accountability or it could be a collaborative enquiry into practice and provision in a specific classroom or school.

Collaborative enquiry andcultural change

• When the leadership of the school invite neighbouring principals to help them explore the impact of a key initiative in school, it becomes an enquiry into practice rather than an external monitoring visit. This helps the host school to understand where it has got to and where to go next.

• It also gives the visiting practitioners an opportunity to explore what is emerging and ask what it might mean for the way things are back in their own schools.

Discussion 2: developing enquiry-

based practice

• To what degree are you ‘ready’ for an

enquiry methodology?

• How would you know?

• How would enquiry methodologies

compliment your existing practices?

• How would enquiry be more effective than

what you already do?

Processes and structures

Network development

• Be instrumental and purposeful - must provide the individual gains, and the shared outcomes, that underpin the collective purposes.

• Generate trust and mutual knowledge -People become drawn into collaborative action because they know others that are involved, understand their reasons, and trust their decision making.

• Help develop a shared identity and make collaboration meaningful - in order to develop a ‘sense of belonging’ and ownership.

What structures work?

Wheel and spoke

Leadership sits at the centre of a web

of engaged teachers. These school-

based teachers focus on their

individual schools, but they also meet

as a network-wide group. Their work

is disseminated at network

conferences.

Advantages

Work is likely to have high degree of

personal meaning for individual

teachers. A critical mass of teachers

can be involved and this gives

economies of scale and may mean it

is possible to secure external support,

i.e. from local university or local

authority.

Disadvantages

Unless the work of individuals is

connected to the wider network and

school structures it may not be taken

up by others and so fail to impact

outside of their classroom or school.

What structures work?

Thematic or role-based

Network configures around

practitioners with similar roles or

project groups are convened to

address particular issues. So it

becomes based on a series of mini-

networks.

Advantages

This structure draws in people that

share subject expertise or an interest

in a specific issue. Such shared foci or

interests can quickly create a critical

mass of experienced people and a

strong community of practice

Disadvantages

There is replication of certain functions

within the sub-networks. This can be

costly and there are few economies of

scale. Problems in transferring

learning and materials between sub-

networks. Schools can become

overloaded with too many initiatives

Balancing structures and processes

Process

Structure

High numbers of productive processes

Highly structured

Low numbers of productive processes

‘Fragmented

innovation’

Numerous productive

processes, poor

structure – not inclusive

x

‘Meeting culture’

High level of

structure/Low level of

productive processes –

unwieldy and costly

Network A

Network BNetwork C

‘On path’ Good

balance of processes

and structure is

building capacity.

Discussion 3 Getting enquiry-based

collaboration going

• What improvement priorities would you

select for collaborative enquiry?

• How could existing teams enquire around

these priorities in your school and/or

network?

• What is the capacity in your school to

release people to enquire?

References and resources

Cordingley P, Bell M, Rundell B, Evans D (2003) The impact of collaborative CPD on classroom teaching and learning. In: Research Evidence in Education Library. Version 1.1. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education.

Daly, A.J., and K.S. Finnigan. 2010. A bridge between worlds: Understanding network structure to understand change strategy. Journal of Educational Change,11, 2: 111-38

Hadfield, M. and Chapman, C. (2009) Leading school-based networks. London: Routledge

Hadfield, M. and Jopling, M. (2012) How might better network theories support school leadership research? School Leadership and Management 32:2, 109-121

de Lima, J. (2010) Thinking more deeply about networks in education. Journal of Educational Change 11, 1-21

Resnick, L.B., (2009) Nested learning systems for the thinking curriculum, Educational Researcher, 39, 3, 183-197