Training, development or learning?
What’s in a name? Over the years a variety of terms have been used when referring to the ongoing development of those involved in the teaching enterprise. In-service training was often used to provide a distinction from initial teacher training. The once ubiquitous term continuing professional development (CPD) then gained considerable popularity and traction. It could be seen to embrace not just teachers but also other adults who work with children, and was a concept used in other professions as well. Above all it was seen as a powerful expression because it signalled an on-going process that was a fundamental feature of what it was to be a professional - someone who took seriously and invested in keeping up to date and in improving their practice.
In all of this there was an interesting debate about whether this was a process of training or education; was teaching a craft with skills to be acquired and honed or more of an art to be nurtured and developed (Fish, 1998)? In more recent times there has been an emerging emphasis on professional knowledge and indeed on the whole notion of professional learning (Timperley and Alton-Lee, 2008). If schools are envisaged as being learning organisations then this embraces the learning of staff as well as pupils. This has led some commentators to use professional learning as a preferred term, or in the case of the Centre for the Use of Research and Evidence in Education (CUREE) the composite expression professional development and learning.
Schools as learning communities
Adopting the perspective of teachers as learners within schools seen as learning communities raises intriguing questions about the nature of such learning and how it relates to the learning of pupils – is it similar and shared or different and distinctive? Certainly there are some who see a distinction between pedagogy: child-led learning, and andragogy: “man” or adult-led learning (Knowles, 1984). But there is much that bridges the two; just as we aim to enable children to become curious inquirers who take increasing control of their own learning, so we also see the great benefits for teachers in becoming research engaged practitioners (Handscomb and MacBeath, 2006).
Learning-centred classrooms
All these matters concerned with learning, development and growth are reflected in this issue of Professional Development Today. The HOW TO section, written by Chris Watkins, is forthright in claiming that actually “learning is a rare focus in classrooms and schools” and that the dominant pattern persists of: “teacher initiates, students responds, teacher evaluates.” Watkins provocatively claims that we have socialised children into schooling but forgotten to socialise them into learning! He provides step by step guidance to restoring and developing learning-centred classrooms where adults as well as children learn and flourish. These HOW TO contributions provide much food for thought including the pithy observation: “The links between teaching and learning are complex and multiple. High-level learning doesn’t come from us teaching our socks off.” This brings to mind the Dylan Wiliam quipthat students go to school not to learn but to watch teachers work!
Learning, leadership and school improvement
In the article by Christopher Chapman and Kevin Lowden they describe how the key concepts of professional learning, co-production and enquiry were built into their initiative, commissioned by the Scottish Government. This aimed to grow teacher leadership and build the capacity of schools, local authorities and their partners. They portray a “solution-focused approach” which promotes sustained collaboration across classroom, school and local authority boundaries to tackle educational inequality. Evidence indicates significant outcomes showing that this School Improvement Partnership Project had a positive impact on both teachers and students. Teacher leaders developed considerable research skills and exercised leadership beyond their school context; and the Partnership helped to close the attainment gap for students. In terms of professional learning the authors suggest that such “networked improvement communities tend to flourish when they draw on a range of approaches including lesson study, instructional rounds, improvement science and collaborative action.”
The next article also explores how a network sought to reduce educational inequality through a professional learning initiative – this time in Bristol and focused on the development of teaching assistants (TAs) to improve the transfer of children with high behaviour support needs from nursery into reception. Interestingly the authors, Liz Jenkins and Rebecca Nelson, highlight the context of schools which have chosen not to convert to academies finding professional development opportunities drastically reduced. This initiative attempted to redress this through a programme which enabled teaching assistants to collaboratively explore case studies. A key feature of this approach was moving from training directed by teachers or external experts to a greater emphasis on TAs’ control of their own development and “participation in a learning community for which they have shared responsibility.”