Educational equity could be improved by better professional learning - a case study

Theme one: PL structured deliberately to facilitate teacher collaboration

The DfE (2016) and Cordingly et al. (2015) note that PL should include collaboration and expert challenge. This viewpoint was comprehensively accentuated through the case study research: the teacher survey identified teacher collaboration as the most impactful area in relation to the quality of PL and, at interview, all respondents spoke of the power of teacher collaboration.

Collaborative PL that takes place live in classrooms during lessons coincides with Weston and Clay's (2018) view which places value on teachers having the opportunity to collaborate and refine PL within and across their own classrooms. Kennedy (2016) explains that PL within the formal context of a course or workshop does not necessarily affect delivery in classrooms. O’Leary (2020) notes peer observation or developmental observation processes as an effective means for achieving this. The interviews and survey data support the view that for effective PL, teachers need to apply ideas from a PL session, and that this requires collaboration opportunities.

O’Leary (2020) warns that senior leaders are often overly concerned with audit trails leaving valuable peer observation for teachers to action voluntarily; however, the findings show both formal and informal teacher collaboration to be essential components within effective PL programmes. Atwal (2019) suggests that formal PL should be structured strategically to foster teacher collaboration and informal learning. Cordingly et al. (2015), Coe et al. (2014) and Wiliam (2014) second this view, advocating for lesson observation routines to be devised to focus on improvement and collaboration between teachers as opposed to evaluation. O’Leary (2020) and Garvey (2017), regard teachers watching one another teach as a highly developmental process which should be systematically developed by school leaders. PL leads should not only appreciate the value of teacher collaboration in PL but create models and processes that provide deliberate collaboration opportunities inclusive of a tangible link between formalised workshops and classroom practice with monitoring processes, including lesson observation, designed accordingly.

Theme two: teacher motivation through balanced autonomy and expertise

Teacher motivation towards PL is an essential component for leaders to consider, impacted by a multitude of factors (Tabak and Sahin, 2020; Garvey, 2017; Kennedy, 2016). Elements which can regularly hinder or ignite motivation link to time, workload, culture, accountability measures, school leadership quality and the way in which PL is delivered (Diasti and Kusawandono, 2020; Ofsted, 2020; O’Leary, 2020; Tabak and Sahin, 2020; Atwal, 2019; Razzaq and Forde, 2012).

Findings from the survey data identified teacher motivation as the second most important factor of impactful PL. Pink's (2018) work on motivation provides a powerful link between motivation and autonomy, stating that amongst other conditions, autonomy is required if one is to be motivated. Durrant (2020) too advocates for agency, which empowers teachers to instigate their own interpretation of internally and externally driven change. O’Leary (2020) writes that enabling teachers to identify their PL needs can lead to meaningful and sustainable improvement. Joyce and Showers (1995) though write of the tension often evident in such instances with conflict between individual and school priorities, with Fuller (2004) noting that the relationship between individual and organisation learning is poorly understood with a causal relationship inaccurately assumed. Alongside this, Gill (2018) and Scott (2004) caution that in many organisations, staff members can have a mistaken perception of themselves depending on the culture apparent. Diasti and Kusawandono (2020) explain how this can be mitigated when practitioners are supported by PL enabling quality reflection, giving accurate recognition to both strengths and development areas.

Evidently, autonomy is no panacea for effective PL (Bush, 2018 and Birbalsingh, 2016); instead, leaders should delve into what an appropriate balance of autonomy equates to within differing departments across a school (Hargreaves and Rolls, 2020 and Wiliam, 2018). For effective autonomy to be implemented, it needs to be engaged with expertise (Diasti and Kusawandono, 2020; Bush, 2018; DfE, 2016; Leithwood et al., 2006). These findings give merit to school leaders effectively distributing autonomy in conjunction with expertise to support teacher motivation.

Theme three: the role of research within PL

There has been a noteworthy movement towards recognising the importance of a research-informed approach to PL (Hargreaves and Rolls, 2020; Wiliam, 2018; Atwal, 2019, DfE, 2016). Contrary to expectations, the quantitative survey data found teachers not to value it in high regard showing it as the least impactful option of those provided, a finding triangulated with only one teacher mentioning the value of research at interview.

Helmsley-Brown and Sharp (2003) found researchers themselves receive limited training on how to present findings which contributes towards teachers’ difficulty in accessing them; Fenwick and Farrell (2011) add that research is primarily written for an academic audience and that the volume of research can be overwhelming. Additionally, in the business of a school day, there can be a disconnect between academic research and tangible impact on classroom practice (Tabak and Sahin, 2020). Atwal (2019) places importance on teachers themselves engaging with academic research, a notion Vare et al. (2021) adapt, explaining that PL should engage educators in research they can then tailor to their setting. The DfE (2016) suggests PL should draw upon evidence including high-quality academic research, detailing that providers of PL require an understanding of research and evidence as opposed to teachers. The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF, 2021) and Myatt (2016) develop the view and highlight the importance of leaders using research to inform but not dictate PL. Effective research dissemination within the PL process is evidently worth considering for both PL leads and researchers, something emphasised by the EEF (2021) redesigning their Teaching and Learning Toolkit to make content more accessible for teachers.

Theme four: PL leads need to understand the needs and views of their teachers

The survey data showed a trend with senior leaders’ answers indicating more positive viewpoints on PL than class teachers’; it could be plausible to suggest that senior leaders consider PL to be more effective than its reality. Durrant (2020) and Pink's (2018) viewpoint on agency can be considered here: because senior leaders have more involvement in the decision-making process around PL, they may experience greater ownership and therefore exaggerate the extent of its success. A simple solution for this, could be to increase teacher agency, whilst another solution would be to enable middle leaders’ heightened autonomy in PL implementation due to their typically closer working relationship with class teachers (Bars et al., 2016). Whilst both solutions could compromise expertise within a PL process, the need for bespoke PL was triangulated by the interviews with four of five teachers recognising the need for PL bespoke to teacher needs.

A third more nuanced solution is for senior leaders to retain some involvement in PL decisions whilst making a heightened effort to understand teacher viewpoints and needs throughout the PL process. This raises an important distinction dependent on quality leadership; for leaders to facilitate effective PL, it is paramount they not just work closely with teachers but that they do this in the right way, gaining a genuine understanding of starting points, thought processes, feelings and expertise (Hargreaves and Rolls, 2020; Weston and Clay, 2018; Allison, 2014). Vare et al. (2021) and O’Leary (2020), write of the trusted relationship needed between deliverers and learners of PL. A limitation of this though is that trust takes time and care to build (2018 Weston and Clay); due to the multiple priorities schools face at a given time, effective application of this idea requires careful consideration (Munby, 2019). To improve PL, it is reasonable to suggest that senior leaders should develop trusting relationships with those they are working with in a time efficient manner so PL is influenced by teachers’ context.

Theme five: the length of a PL cycle

There is ample recognition that PL should run for a sustained time period if it is to obtain successful outcomes (Hargreaves and Rolls, 2020; O’Leary, 2020; DfE, 2016; Kennedy, 2016; Alison, 2014) with time often short supply in schools (Weston and Clay, 2018 and Cordingly et al., 2015), a challenge is presented (Atwal, 2019 and Munby, 2019). This premise was triangulated with quantitative survey data showing 41% of teachers felt the given PL cycle should have run for longer. A disparity between class teachers’ and leaders viewpoints was again apparent with just 14% of senior and 12% of middle leaders showing the same view; the complexity behind these views should not be understated as it is also apparent that 59% of teachers did not show a preference to the cycle running for longer.

The varied viewpoints encourage reflection around PL duration and whether the same time should be allocated for all participants. A limitation on any timeframe recommendation is that different adults invariably learn at differing rates (Dreyfus, 2004). With ideal timings dependent on the content being focused and the expertise of participants, a context-specific timeline draws merit. One straight forward finding though is that some class teachers within the context of the study would prefer more time for PL to embed.

The application of this concept is often underestimated by school leaders (Atwal, 2019). Schools are incredibly complex systems with constant tensions between sustainable PL offering long-term benefits impacted by short-term priorities requiring quick fixes (Fullan, 2020; Hargreaves and Rolls, 2020; Atwal, 2019). Durrant (2020) and Myatt (2016) write of the excessive external pressures that contribute towards leaders misplacing teachers’ time and focus away from valuable activities like PL. PL leads, therefore, need the foresight of high-pressured, complex system navigation (Fullan, 2020 and Kotter, 2012) and a heightened awareness of the need to generate sufficient quick wins whilst preserving the majority of time to work on sustainable long-term change (Atwal, 2019; Hill et al., 2017; King, 2011; Kotter, 1995). Despite the recognised importance of sustained PL (DfE, 2016; Cordingly et al., 2015; Eraut, 2004; Guskey, 2002), there is less clarity quantifying a recommended time period. Vare et al. (2021) however advocate that PL should run for at least two terms and Kennedy (2016) suggests at least a year as a suitable time to assess PL impact on student outcomes.