Mini-Whiteboards: My Weapon Against Lockdown Learning Loss

Reflecting back on the past term, I wanted to share some of the strategies I’ve used to make the most of the humble mini-whiteboard (the one thing you will definitely want in your classroom come January).

1. Routines

I’ve used mini-whiteboards a lot before, especially when it came to quizzing KS4/5 groups in the run-up to their final exams.  However, starting September with a Year 7 group (fresh from 6 months out of school) made me realise the importance of teaching routines when using mini-whiteboards; this was something I’d taken for granted with the older students, who’d handily already been drilled in these routines by the maths department.

The ‘Show-Me Boards’ routine in Oliver Caviglioli and Tom Sherrington’s Walkthrus book was perfect for this, so much so that I ended up embedding that and other walkthrus into our whole-school CPD programme (our current focus is explicitly teaching questioning routines).  Teaching and explicitly rehearsing the routines has helped my Year 7 whiteboard experience be much more efficient, especially now that they are able to put boards up at exactly the same time and let me read them without too much fuss.

2. For Quizzing

Multiple-choice quizzes, true/false responses, short written responses, pictures: the whiteboard is so much more versatile than verbal feedback.  It also has the added benefit that all students have to guess or contribute in some form (it’s definitely ‘no opt out’ for my classes, as a blank board is a sure way to get me to ask you some questions to help you form a response).

Using mini-whiteboards for this overcomes the tension between ‘hands-up’ and ‘cold-call’, as every student is able to share their answer, giving you a quick indication of what they do (or don’t) know.  With some many gaps in knowledge and misconceptions post-lockdown - as well as an increase in our lesson time to 100 minutes - it’s never been more important to be able to assess and plug gaps within a lesson.  Mini-whiteboards make that first step quick, easy and painless.

I also think there are benefits in terms of effective retrieval practice too: RP works best when the stakes are low.  Mini-whiteboard responses are temporary: perfect for guesses.  Low stakes can easily be, therefore, part of the package.

3. Drafting and Redrafting

This has been - by far - the best way I’ve used mini-whiteboards this term with my Y11 and Y13 groups.  At first, I struggled with not being able to hover over students and give ongoing verbal feedback as they practised essay tasks and exam answers.  However, with mini-whiteboards they’ve been able to draft a section, get instant feedback from a distance and then redraft it onto paper.

This has helped my students with focusing on specific elements of their writing (as we’ve used this method to deliberately practise our topic sentence structure and introductions) but it’s also meant that students can quickly make progress within the lesson, rather than waiting for me to take in books and get feedback a week later.  It’s certainly harder with my larger Y11 groups, but in this case I tend to use more whole-class feedback (though, again, I don’t need to wait to take in books for their responses).

I hope that some of this has been helpful.  Please let me know if you'd like to hear more, or if you have any other suggestions for me to make the most of the new-age slate.

#edCPDchat reflections: CPD and Teacher Autonomy

It’s been a busy few weeks (or year…) for many of us, but I was gutted to miss this week’s #edCPDchat, especially given the focus on the relationship between CPD and teacher autonomy.  This is an area that I’m trying to develop in my own department this year (I blogged on the approach I’ve taken here) so I was keen to sit down and take a look through the discussion.

Q1: How do you balance whole-school priorities with individual need, making sure that staff feel the relevance of the CPD that is available to them?

@meredithfox22 made the excellent point that this is a big challenge (there can often be tension between the priorities of a school and individual needs).  She pointed out how appraisal targets might not always be the best way, and I agree with this (especially where these targets are also linked to pay progression and/or student outcomes).

The approach @MMinton10 mentioned could offer another way though, with staff undertaking an action research project and getting training in order to do so.  From what I’ve seen, this is becoming a popular approach in schools and can be an excellent way of engaging staff with research, though I do feel that the CPD that sits alongside it is also important.  Where staff are given too much freedom and little/no guidance alongside this, it’s possible that the process in itself can be forgotten until two weeks before it’s time to share the “findings”.  In short: any individual projects need to be given regular time where staff can collaborate, reflect and refine their approaches.

@MMinton10 also mentioned how her school’s action research focus areas are decided in collaboration with school/department priorities.  I can definitely see the value in this myself, as my department have worked on a similar model (albeit on a much smaller scale) this term, where we all looked to develop our questioning by choosing a single strategy to refine over the term.  It worked well for us as it enabled for more collaboration (through paired reflection time and peer observations) as staff shared an overarching goal that also matched up with a whole-school priority.

However, I’m starting to wonder if @PearceMrs has a better idea to follow, with the mention of an ‘individual CPD plan’ that’s created with a line manager.  She highlighted how it also acts as a form of feedback, so that CPD can be balanced between whole-school and individual needs (it would also mean CPD is responsive to staff need, a priority mentioned by @SaysMiss).  Of course, time could be a potential issue- but perhaps that’s a reason for schools to start to look at how much time they allow for CPD.  Do we really spend enough time developing our teachers?

Q2: Can teachers ever have total autonomy over their CPD?

@MMinton10 made the important point that teacher autonomy is a key ingredient in increasing motivation.  In that sense, we definitely need to value teacher autonomy if we want to retain and develop great teachers.

However, the tension between school priorities and individual needs can make ‘total autonomy’ problematic.  @DoctorPreece mentioned this by stating that we need a shared culture, which whole-school priorities are part of.  I feel that what this looks like (and how much autonomy teachers have as result) will vary from school to school though, especially when you consider @SaysMiss’ point that individual priorities are more likely to be aligned if ethos and culture are explicit.  Perhaps schools who are still developing a sense of shared culture might need less than total teacher autonomy in the meantime?

A teacher’s own knowledge might also impact how much autonomy is best too: @greeborunner highlighted how novices could easily become overwhelmed so maybe, as @DoctorPreece suggests, there should be a narrower range of options in these cases.  That being said, if you were to develop individual CPD plans with line managers (as @PearceMrs mentioned earlier) this might be a barrier overcome through support and coaching rather than narrowing what’s on offer.

The biggest idea for me to consider for Q2, though, was the concept of ‘flexi-INSET time’ mentioned by @PearceMrs (which is very topical, given the recent release of @Emma_Turner75’s new book on flexible working).  I think that I definitely need to consider what this looks like on a departmental level after seeing the benefits of collapsing department time for individual CPD over the past term.  I especially liked how there was still a degree of low-stakes accountability as staff log their engagement, which in turn acts as feedback for those overseeing CPD.  I do agree with @ajm_PE that the potential for wasted time is a potential pitfall, but one that can be overcome if you support staff with the process- perhaps in combination with individual CPD plans.

Q3: How can performance management be a lever for teacher autonomy over their development needs?

Do we need to consider a national model to ensure that there’s a consistent, growth-led approach?

Some big questions here (in line with the well crafted questions throughout from @KLMorgan_2 and @MissLLewis who led this week’s chat).  In my opinion, a lot of the problems highlighted are due to the way performance management has been used by some schools as a ‘high-stakes, high-accountability’ measure that has pressured staff rather than supported them.  @piersyoung mentioned how PM processes often assume a ‘linear system’, which doesn’t reflect the actual processes of learning and progress in staff development.  @lucyheighton also warned that any national model would need to make the links between any criteria and pay progression explicit, though does teacher development and performance management need to be related to pay at all?

I agree with @ajm_PE that PM that is linked to pay is in danger of ‘killing intrinsic motivation’ and with @PearceMrs’ suggestions that development and engagement with CPD should be seen as valuable in itself, rather than being directly linked with outcomes.  At the MAT I work in, we see this as a feature of the ‘mutual professional trust’ that is important to our culture.

When it comes to the idea of a national model, I feel that this could be beneficial, especially as it could facilitate better ongoing CPD when staff move schools (which could, in turn, support teacher retention).  It could also have the potential of weeding out some of the poorer-quality CPD that’s out there by offering a QA process/trusted standard (in turn making better use of both school budgets and teachers’ time).

For the tension between teacher autonomy and school priorities, of course a form of ‘performance management’ (albeit not necessarily in the form many schools will be familiar with) could be useful in maintaining the right balance.  However, less micro-managing and more of the ‘tight-loose’ approach that @KLMorgan_2 tweeted from the @edCPDchat account might be a sensible way forwards.

A massive thank you to @KLMorgan_2 and @MissLLewis for running the chat this week, as well as to everyone who contributed for your reflections.

#edCPDchat will return in 2021.  Follow the @edCPDchat twitter account for more updates.

A Toolkit to Evaluate CPD

In recent years, the school and trust that I work within has committed to the idea that quality CPD needs to be subject-specific by giving more directed time to subject meetings, as opposed to whole-school training.

On one level, this is an excellent opportunity for CPD to become more bespoke; the introduction of personalised, evidence-informed practice projects has also fed into this.

However, I’m conscious that - as a subject leader - much of my understanding of what makes effective CPD comes from my own wider reading, engagement with edutwitter (and more recently #edCPDchat) and external training opportunities (such as the Expert Middle Leaders course with Ambition Institute).  This led to me to reflect on how I can support the other English leads across our trust without an approach that is prescriptive, as the context and priorities of each department do vary significantly.

Part of this has been to focus on collaborative resourcing, through creating folders on Teams to share slides, book extracts/blogs, videos and examples/non-examples.  The launch of a ‘CPD portal’ across our trust will take this further still, as each department will record CPD sessions to share on different elements of English teaching (alongside cross-subject videos) to access as part of department time, or by individual staff.

That being said, I was still keen to ensure that subject leaders were aware of some of the ‘active ingredients’ of CPD (as - like in the classroom - quality resources doesn’t always mean quality delivery).  It was for this reason that I was glad to read Bruce Robertson’s ‘The Teaching Delusion’, specifically when it came to the ‘toolkit’ he mentions (a list of what you’d want to see in the classroom, to help teachers reflect and evaluate).

I then set to drafting a version of this for CPD so that, alongside training on effective CPD and exploration of good practice, the subject leaders I work with would be able to reflect and evaluate on how to develop their delivery of departmental CPD.  I used Robertson’s model for this, aiming to give some examples of what the active ingredients might look like in practice alongside a space to self-evaluate and reflect.  Adam Marsh (@ajm_PE) also gave some really helpful feedback in ensuring that I’d covered different aspects of what makes quality CPD.

It’s still in its infancy at the moment, though the feedback on the draft version has been positive, as well as helping as a shared reference point for discussing the ‘active ingredients of CPD’.  You can see the first part of this below, but feel free to contact me on Twitter (@rjmcdonald24) if you want more details.

#edCPDchat reflections: Middle-leadership of CPD

The vote on this week’s topic was close, but I have to admit that I was glad of the result: middle-leadership of CPD.  It obviously ties in my own research on planning and delivering departmental CPD  (through an article for Impact and in a previous blog), but the timing for this week’s chat also lined up with a meeting that afternoon, where I’d gone through how I’d applied the ‘active ingredients’ of CPD with the other English leads in my trust.

Q1: What do you use and who do you consult, when designing CPD programmes?

The majority of the discussion here centred on the ‘who’ in the question, with many agreeing that those being developed should be part of this process.  @EnserMark highlighted how we should be considering our team's interests and needs, with others highlighting different ways of gathering this information (such as an audit questionnaire, from @ajm_PE; a team discussion, from @meredithfox22; or regular one-to-one discussions, from @m_chiles).  I can see (and have used) each of these suggestions, as the audit has the advantage of getting all the feedback into one place while the others enable the personal touch, which is important in terms of understanding staff needs and also gaining their buy-in.

However, I also feel that we need to be aware of the limitations of this approach: can we assume that all staff are able to recognise their own areas to develop?  Whilst, in my opinion, it’s important for them to self-reflect and have input, surely it’s also important to use informal (and low-stakes) evaluation of what happens in the classroom too- which is why I also consult with my second in department, so that we can discuss the needs we have seen whilst visiting lessons or looking at learning in books.

When it came to discussing the ‘what’ in the question, @ajm_PE noted that (after deciding priorities) it would fall to the leader to decide whether they should deliver aspects themselves or delegate (especially for areas they weren’t as knowledgeable in).  @ATT_Institute also highlighted the subject-specific needs, meaning that the curriculum plan would be an important resource to consult when it comes to planning CPD over time.

In the conversation, I also posted the question of whether we should be using cognitive science to  design CPD (as this has been something I’ve focused on recently to develop my own approach).  @bibliogeodie agreed, seeing the learning processes we consider for students as applicable for teacher learning too.  @JoyceMatthews_ returned to this idea in a discussion for Q2 as well, asking whether leaders are trained in the processes for teaching adult learners.

Q2: How can you make department meetings into CPD opportunities?

The most common response to this question revolved around reducing the focus on administrative tasks through weekly emails/bulletins or restricting the time for notices to a short slot at the end of the meeting.  @EnserMark also noted that the purpose of these meetings needs to be clear, so that staff know it’s time for CPD, with @MissLLewis pointing out that one way to build this culture is to delegate concepts to experts in the department.  This is not a strength for me, though I'm hoping that giving staff more ownership as they identify their own areas to develop this year will be a step towards this kind of collaboration.

I also liked @m_chiles’ suggestion that some of this time should be spent practising explanations, which would feed into @SaysMiss’ mention of the need for immediate application, so the CPD covered should be relevant to what the team are covering at that moment.  For this reason, @SaysMiss bought in the need for CPD programmes to be responsive.  I definitely agree with this, as I am constantly reviewing my long-term plan for department CPD to ensure that it matches current priorities (even if it’s just a case of adapting the planned focus).

Q3: How can you ensure that subject development aligns with whole-school priorities?

This question linked back to an earlier contribution from @NLad84, where he mentioned that the thing to consult after assessing your team’s needs would be whole-school priorities, so that the departmental plans would be aligned with them.  @isaacmoore7 pointed out that ‘if designed well, a school’s priorities should flow into departments’, alongside a mention of the need for ‘room’ for department-specific plans.  I felt that his choice of the word ‘designed’ was particularly important here, as this synergy does require effective planning and also excellent communication between SLT and middle-leaders.

The teaching and learning briefing format we have adopted at my own school helps with this, as this year we have a pre-recorded briefing played to departments (at the start of department time) as a reminder of a whole-school focus area.  Middle leaders can then follow up in their department meeting (as appropriate), which is supported by the termly plan I’ve put together for these briefings.

This model illustrates @EnserMark’s idea about a short whole-school input followed by more time for departments to explore and apply those concepts in a subject-specific context though I also agree with his tweet that school leaders make it a ‘priority to improve subject knowledge and subject pedagogy’.  For this reason, it should be subject leaders who are planning their programmes of CPD, as they know their subject, their teams and the needs of both best.

Thanks to everyone who took part in the chat, and also to @greeborunner for doing a great job of hosting this week.  Don’t forget to vote for next week’s topic here!

#edCPDchat Reflections: QA of Teaching and Learning

This week’s discussion was another great one, as many of us tried to get to the bottom of how we can make QA of teaching and learning something that contributes to development, rather than a check for accountability.

Q1: Is there any value in ‘measuring’ the quality of teaching and learning?

Firstly, I have to highlight how the interpretation of ‘measure’ is crucial here, and this caused some initial debate over the meaning in relation to QA.  Perhaps unhelpfully, you can use the word for both quantitative and qualitative purposes (with the example highlighting the topic of our discussion when I checked this definition online).

Quantitative measurements were mostly seen to be lacking in value, with @SaysMiss highlighting how there are too many variables involves in teaching and learning, as well as so much of the quality of teaching being open to interpretation.  Instead, Kat posed that evaluation of teaching should be through conversations, a sentiment shared by many others in the discussion.

@NLad84 highlighted how the purpose of the QA processes needs to be developmental, and this is where I see the conversations mentioned by @SaysMiss playing an important part.  However, I feel that you can still ‘measure’ the quality of teaching (albeit qualitatively) through this process though @robertkelly95’s point that any expectations need to be clear is important to this.  It’s very true that ‘the quality of teaching is subjective’ (@Heimdayl) though if you build a shared understanding of what quality looks like, it provides a form of measure that can then be the basis of developmental conversations.

My own takeaways from this question were mostly focused on the idea of purpose and intent, and I really liked the question from @informed_edu that asked whether measuring quality was aiming to prove something or improve something.  You’d hope the latter, in which case the process should be designed to empower teachers to self-reflect and self-evaluate through supportive feedback.

Q2: What are the pressures on leaders when it comes to QA?

Time (unsurprisingly) was a common theme for this area, whether it was having the time to have the conversations mentioned earlier (@lcgeography) or the time to ‘do something meaningful’ with any information collected (@EnserMark).  For me, this is where school leadership plays a large part (as the main stakeholders capable of giving staff this time are headteachers and SLT).

Others also discussed how a school’s external stakeholders (whether it be Ofsted, the LEA or trust leadership) can also have impact on the pressures, with @greeborunner mentioning that rigid approaches to QA that don’t adapt for a school’s context can lead to ticklists and cutting corners.  @lcgeography linked this back to the earlier concept of the purpose of QA too (I’d certainly argue that there are external bodies out there who are using it as an accountability tool rather than a developmental one).

Overall, I agreed with @SaysMiss’ view in this area, as she bought up the need to balance external accountability with knowing what helps teachers improve, as ‘data doesn’t measure everything’.  In this sense, I feel that it’s important that those who lead on teacher development (whether it be through SLT or as a subject leader) should be trained in what makes effective CPD, and how QA fits into that as a developmental process.  @NikkiSSmith put this really well, seeing QA as needing to be ‘supportive and developmental, not judgemental’.

Q3: What makes effective QA of Teaching & Learning?

After reading responses to the previous questions, it was clear to me that QA needs to be a dialogic and developmental process for it to have the desired impact (improvement of teaching and learning).  @GLT_MAT also sees it as a process that involves both teachers and leaders, stating that QA should involve ‘co-construction of what great looks like’.

Culture was another aspect mentioned by several people in the discussion, which reflected some of what I’ve been fortunate enough to experience in the leadership for my school and MAT (Jonny Uttley’s book, ‘Putting Staff First’ - co-authored with John Tomsett is a great read for this).  @Mr_N_Wood highlighted how a culture of trust can reduce staff anxiety, which means staff are going to be able to develop more.  However, I can also agree with @robertkelly95 that it’s important to be clear about the expectations we - as leaders - have for the classroom so that we can still hold staff accountable and help them develop if standards are not met.

Evaluating My Independent CPD

In the spirit of the advice and tips for NQTs as they start off their first week of teaching, I wanted to write a little about some advice I’ve give to my NQT self and any other ‘pedageeks’ out there.

I’ve always been a keen reader (unsurprising for an English teacher) and vividly remember piling up 15 books at a time from the local library to take home and devour during the summer holidays as a child.  Imagine my delight then when, as a trainee, a retiring host teacher gave me her copy of ‘A Teacher’s Toolkit’ by Paul Ginnis.  I’d discovered a whole new genre of books about teaching which was only fuelled by getting myself involved with edutwitter, educational blogs and journals such as those produced by the Chartered College of Teaching, ResearchEd and NATE.

However, I recently came across a list of ideas and strategies that I’d compiled after the ‘Team English National Conference 2019’, which listed lots of things I wanted to trial or develop in my teaching during the following academic year.  Many of them had fallen by the wayside, either after one attempt or completely forgotten by the time I was back in the classroom.  Finding this list has really made me question the way I manage my own CPD and the extent to which I practise what I plan for the CPD of others in my department, school and trust.

In comparison, I have actually managed to develop my understanding and use of dual coding in my teaching after Oliver Caviglioli’s brilliant presentation at the ResearchEd National Conference last year.  The difference is that I actively worked to make it into a habit by deliberately focusing on it as a strategy and, after reflection and feedback from others, continually practising it until it became part of my practice.

What I want to do differently this year is a process I wish I’d considered more in my earlier career, ensuring that I acknowledge:

• The limits of how many new things I can improve at a time
• The importance of the ‘continued’ in CPD (seeing new ideas/concepts as a developing thread rather than a single event)
• Remembering that I need to consciously practice a habit repeatedly before it becomes automatic

Hopefully, the process that I’m introducing my department to (using a version of the ADAPT model from Caviglioli and Sherrington’s ‘Walkthrus’ book) will help me enable my department to do the same (see this previous blog for more details).

#edCPDchat reflections: Components of Coaching

This week’s #edCPDchat was an interesting one for me, as the topic of coaching allowed me to reflect further on recent training on instructional coaching (with Ambition Institute) and reading around the topic to develop a peer coaching model in my department from September, as outlined in this previous blog post.

Throughout the conversation, I was continually asking myself to what extent my plans were actually a form of coaching, as well as considering how I might adapt my plans to make them more effective.

Q1: Can anyone learn to be a coach?

I feel that @EnserMark summed this up concisely when he stated that coaches might struggle to hide it if their ‘personality sucks’.  Unsurprisingly, many others agreed that personality traits were key to a good coach, including being able to ‘believe in capable people’ (@Steven_Berryman) and the need to be ‘kind’ and ‘empathetic’ (@EnserMark).  In a thread later on, @teach_music_ldn also highlighted the importance of a moral purpose, with the coaches needs being the core of the process, not the ‘feather in [the coach’s] cap’.

It also seemed that there was agreement in the need for coaching to be a choice as well, with @MissM0Eng3 stating that there ‘shouldn’t be an expectation that everyone is a coach’ though @HenrySauntson highlighted that a ‘culture of collaboration’ is still a possibility (perhaps with coaching as a part of it, rather than a process everyone follows).

There was also agreement in that learning to be a coach is a process that needs time, with @DrRLofthouse explaining that ‘learning to coach is a developmental process’ with a need for this to be ‘scaffolded’.  This concept, along with the process of ‘focused practice and a reflective feedback loop’ for developing coaches (@Mr_N_Wood), leads to this idea proposed by @Steven_Berryman: coaches should be ‘willing to be coached’ themselves.

Q2: What are the active ingredients of effective coaching?

The consensus for this question involved many agreeing that effective coaching needs active listening, a lack of judgements being made and space (both physical and temporal) for the conversations to happen.  I found this document from CfBT Education Trust (mentioned by @DrRLofthouse in the chat) really useful in outlining what the processes of listening might look like to promote an effective coaching dialogue.  This is vital if we take @informed_edu’s contribution of coaching dialogue being ‘a reflective conversation to stimulate learning and growth’.

I also felt that @jillberry102’s tweet about coaching taking a ‘how can we?’ rather than a ‘why can’t we?’ approach relevant here, especially with the links back to the positive personality traits that were mentioned in the first part of the discussion.

The discussion at this point also turned to a comparison between coaching and mentoring, which becomes trickier in a sense (given that there are different forms of coaching).  I agreed with @Steven_Berryman that coaching should be a ‘meeting of equals’ whereas mentoring implies a hierarchical relationship.  Other contributions highlighted that the coach is there to ‘support [the coachee] in reaching their own conclusions’ through ‘open questioning and reflection’ (@bibliogeordie).  This clashed a little with my understanding of instructional coaching in particular, with Steve Farndon seeing a need for ‘direct, explicit instruction’ for instructional coaching to be ‘efficient’, with this form of coaching assuming ‘that there are some areas where [the coachee] is more novice’ (2019).  That being said, instructional coaching can still seen as a dialogical model, with Caviglioli and Sherrington seeing it as a process where ‘teacher and coaches work together as partners’ (2020) as well as the dialogical process being highlighted in both the CfBT document shared by @DrRLofthouse and ‘Leading Coaching in Schools’ from NCSL.

Q3: How can a coaching culture be grown across a school?

I feel that the main component in the final section of the chat can be summed up in a single word: trust.  @EnserMark stated how a ‘them and us’ culture prevents this and, therefore will prevent the growth of a coaching culture.  @DrRLofthouse also mentioned how successful coaching is ‘harder to achieve in a performative culture’, which gives more reason to decouple it from any performance management process (better still: remove the performance management ‘objectives’ entirely).

Time was another factor cited by people in the discussion, as we all felt that a coaching culture isn’t something that can be generated overnight.  I found @robertkelly95’s reflection really useful here, as he explained how his school changed from the initial plan of all staff being coaches due to the time needed for training (‘better to have a small group of well-trained coaches doing it well’).

My Plans

Overall, it’s difficult for me to justify my initial plans for ‘peer coaching pairs’ as actual coaching.  I think that the element of choice was an important one, as well as the fact that it would be difficult to balance developing my department as effective coaching with other CPD needs, much as @robertkelly95 found in his school.  However, I still feel that pairing staff up for reflection and structuring some of this reflection (in our department meetings) with coaching-style scaffolds will be beneficial.  In the meantime, perhaps I need to consider whether staff might opt-in to a coaching programme across the school.

Thanks again to everyone who joined in this week’s chat for your contributions and expertise.  I hope that anyone who was back at school this week also has a restful weekend, though don’t forget to vote for our next topic on Sunday!

#edCPDchat runs every Wednesday at 7:30pm.  Details of upcoming topics can be found at the @edCPDchat account.

References

Caviglioli O and Sherrington T (2020) Teaching Walkthrus: Five-step guides for instructional coaching. Woodbridge: John Catt Educational Ltd.

Creasey and Paterson (2005) NCSL Leading Coaching in Schools. Available at: http://www.lcll.org.uk/uploads/3/0/9/3/3093873/leading_coaching_in_schools.pdf

Farndon, S (2019) What is instructional coaching? Available at: https://www.ambition.org.uk/blog/what-instructional-coaching/ 

Lofthouse, Leat and Towler (2010) CfBT Coaching for teaching and learning: a practical guide for schools. Available at: https://www.ncl.ac.uk/media/wwwnclacuk/cflat/files/coaching-for-teaching.pdf

#edCPDchat reflections: CPD after lockdown

 

It’s been amazing to see how the concept of an online community talking about quality CPD has grown so quickly from a thread started by @greeborunner and developed into the first #edCPDchat last week.  I’m really proud to have been a part of this alongside Zoe and also colleagues at the Teacher Development Trust (David Weston, Kathryn Morgan, Maria Cunningham and Michelle Barker).

That there was so much engagement in last week’s chat is a testament to those who care about the development of their staff and are actively reflecting on how to give staff the best deal in CPD going forwards.  Below is a summary of some of the key ideas from last week’s chat.

Q1: Planning for 2020-21

The first question asked us to consider the contingencies we’d likely need to consider for the coming academic year, so several responses inevitably centred around the possibility of local lockdowns and blended/remote learning.  @EnserMark highlighted how we need to ensure we’re not ‘caught by surprise’ this time by training staff on what makes effective remote teaching and learning.  We then discussed how this might overlap with classroom pedagogy (so the CPD had a life beyond a lockdown scenario), though Mark highlighted that we need to ensure that staff don’t just replicate classroom teaching on a remote platform (possibly by highlighting the differences between classroom learning and remote learning).

The impact of social distancing on the delivery of CPD was brought up by @robertkelly95, as he shared how his school are moving to CPD delivery in small teams rather than all staff training together.  He explained how this could mean CPD is more tailored to these groups.  I can definitely see this, as it would enable more subject-specific CPD if in subject groups- something we’re pursuing in my school by having a whole-school virtual T&L briefing that’s followed by a subject-specific session in department groups.

The ways in which technology enable us to share and celebrate expertise was also mentioned by Robert, as he mentioned how it could be used to celebrate expertise across the whole school.  Others also shared how they’d done this last year through formats such as a T&L newsletter (@PearceMrs) and a ‘Team’ on Microsoft Teams that had different channels for different strands of CPD (@CeriBoyle).

The content we choose for CPD was also a factor for next year’s planning that @steven_berryman mentioned, in both supporting the bespoke needs of our staff and also not overwhelming them (a sentiment shared by @teacherhead and @greeborunner in tweets they posted as schools returned this week).

Q2: Learnings from Lockdown

Unsurprisingly, many of us again shared how learning more about online learning (both in terms of pedagogy and technology) will impact CPD for the coming months, so that we are prepared for the potential of blended/remote learning.

However, the growth of remote CPD options for teachers was also flagged as an opportunity to exploit by @EnserMark, who mentioned the high quality of online learning available to staff during lockdown (a view I share after attending various webinars, watching the ResearchEdHome videos and attending the Team English online conference).  Mark also noted how it meant teachers were interacting more on virtual platforms, opening up international discussions and CPD.

The benefit of remote CPD is not lost on me, as living in the bucolic East Riding of Yorkshire means that attending conferences/CPD in most major cities can be tricky; I’m definitely hoping for some movement of training online to support with this.  Part-time staff would also find this more useful, as @CeriBoyle noted how on-demand CPD means that it’s more flexible around part-timers and those with other commitments.

Q3: Current CPD Priorities

When it comes to the current priorities, the reoccurring theme of remote learning was prominent again, as many of us shared the need to train staff on effective remote learning.  I particularly liked the idea from @teach_music_ldn, who is using ‘teaching trios’ for peer observations from September and plans on using these groups to support remote learning CPD (with the potential for moving the peer observations to drop-ins on online sessions if remote CPD is used).  I think this would be a great way of ensuring that staff still get to benefit from feedback on their teaching if we do have a local lockdown (though it will be important to have the right culture in place so that it does not get perceived as a process for ‘checking up’ on staff).

There were also contributions from those who are planning to mitigate the impact of students having been away from school for so long, with @lcgeography mentioning the importance of metacognitive strategies and @robertkelly95 highlighting how giving staff clear CPD on behaviour management/expectations will be important as we return.

My Plans

Although it was a hectic 30 minutes keeping up with so many responses, I feel that last Wednesday definitely gave me a lot of important thoughts for the CPD I plan.  It’s certainly made me consider how I can make the most of online tools to build CPD across the different English teachers in my trust, as well as the potential for peer observation to continue if we move to remote learning (as this is a key feature of my department’s CPD that I mentioned in my last blog).

Thanks to all of the contributors to last week’s chat, and sorry if I didn’t mention you directly- there were so many brilliant tweets to choose from!

#edCPDchat runs every Wednesday at 7:30pm.  Details of upcoming topics can be found at the @edCPDchat account.

Developing Departmental CPD

Over the summer, I’ve also spent a lot of time reflecting on the CPD I plan and deliver in order to consider how I can maximise the impact of the CPD for colleagues next year.  A large part of this has involved looking at the CPD for my department, developing on ideas I’ve written about in a previous blog on departmental CPD and in an article for Impact journal.

There can’t be any doubt about the importance of good subject-specific CPD in terms of its impact on a teacher’s practice (as it can be more context-specific) but I also feel it’s important to highlight the potential impact it can have on teacher wellbeing (and, therefore, retention) with the latest TALIS report highlighting ‘a strong focus on providing meaningful and impactful opportunities for professional learning’ as being one of five predictors for teachers’ job satisfaction (Schleicher, 2020).  For this reason, I constantly evaluate my approach to CPD to ensure that my team get the best deal possible.

Developing Retrieval Practice

As with student learning, retrieval practice in teacher CPD can help to embed new pedagogical knowledge into the long-term memory, so it becomes part of their practice.  I’ve been working on developing this over the past couple of years by identifying key threads that we return to across different sessions as well as some brief quizzes in both departmental and whole-school CPD sessions.

However, whilst the ‘key threads’ approach has helped make the programme of CPD more cohesive, I worry that I haven’t focused enough on staff actively retrieving knowledge from prior sessions so (with busy teachers) sometimes important knowledge gets lost.  To better support the impact of retrieval, this year I’m planning the retrieval more specifically (see below) to both assess which knowledge we need to go over and activate the prior knowledge before we develop it further.

Developing Links to Whole-School CPD

Reinforcing the links with whole-school CPD has also been something that I wanted to work on in the coming year, especially given that I co-ordinate the regular CPD briefings for staff.  Next year, our head has suggested moving these from the weekly morning slot to a video briefing at the start of department meetings, therefore allowing departments to discuss ideas from the briefing and apply it to their own context.

Again, reviewing the way I plan these will be important to maximising the impact so, in addition to planning them across a term so that ‘key threads’ run through the sessions, this year I’m getting more feedback from other subject leaders on the proposed sessions, as well as adding in ideas for what to discuss in each department meeting to enable other subject leaders to make the links between the whole-school sessions and their subject-specific CPD.

Developing Staff Ownership

Lastly, I wanted to improve the ownership my staff felt over their own CPD so that I can promote the sense of autonomy that is key to professionalism (Booth, Perry and Boylan, 2019).  Last year, I introduced a regular CPD audit for staff (via a simple online form) to help with this and it was a really useful way of looking at what staff wanted to look at in department time and where they wanted resources to research something independently.  However, I wanted to provide more structured opportunities (and time) for staff to pursue their own development.

I decided on a form of peer coaching to do this, especially as coaching and mentoring were identified as valuable for professional learning across the different evidence reviewed by Weston and Hindley (2019).  For this, I’ve paired the team up to work on their choice of strategies from ‘Teaching Walkthrus’ with a process based on the book’s ‘ADAPT’ model (Caviglioli and Sherrington, 2020).

Whilst I’m aware that the process I’m following may not follow a set coaching model, I’m hoping that using it to introduce CPD on the principles of coaching may give me a foundation to formalise a supportive coaching process at a late stage.

Evaluating the Process

I’m hoping these developments will help to improve the provision for my team, both in terms of giving them more autonomy when it comes to their professional development and continuing the drive for excellent teaching for the children at our school.  However, it will be crucial to consider the impact throughout the year through conversations and opportunities for feedback.  That being said, I’m most looking forward to visiting the classrooms to see my team do what they do best: teach.

References

Booth J, Perry E and Boylan M (2019) Understanding Teaching as a Profession. Teacher CPD: International trends, opportunities and challenges. P35-41. Available at: https://chartered.college/download-international-teacher-cpd-report/

Caviglioli O and Sherrington T (2020) Teaching Walkthrus: Five-step guides for instructional coaching. Woodbridge: John Catt Educational Ltd.

Schleicher, A (2020) TALIS 2018: Insights and Reflections. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/education/talis/TALIS2018_insights_and_interpretations.pdf

Weston, D and Hindley, B (2019) Professional Development: Evidence of What Works. Teacher CPD: International trends, opportunities and challenges. P60-67. Available at: https://chartered.college/download-international-teacher-cpd-report/