ideasfarm.net

A possible model to support the ideas outlined in previous posts. This version is suited to 11-19 education sectors. I also have a possible funding model for this which uses existing resources and would only need finance for the initial setup. The description is brief but a fuller model description is available.

The Practitioners are at the heart of the structure with their own community (or several) facilitated and supported by the HE sector. The practitioners have integral links to other specialist communities such as subject associations or an opportunity to enter dialogue directly with the DCFS. That would enable direct and democratic consultation by DCFS, QCA, TDA and others when necessary.

The model requires that every practitioner is required to be a member and that is reinforced by providing a clear unavoidable purpose. In this model all communication for student examinations uses the same platform. It also supports the notion of online learning and examination for students with the teacher/facilitator interacting with their own students and even other students they are assessing or supporting. These students need not be in the same country. It also provides a mechanism for sharing the knowledge and support of specialist teachers and others both with students and practitioners.

An example:

Some ‘subjects’, computing and electronics are but two, are struggling to survive as taught entities. That may be because of a shortage of specialist teachers and or low students numbers making a class in a school unviable. The specialist teacher need not be in the school. This approach also supports the notion of an expert supporting a teacher new to a subject or one wishing to develop expertise in that subject while in post. That teacher or learning facilitator could take the plunge confident that an expert was on hand to support them with difficulties and insight. The sharing of insight, experience or tacit knowledge depends, crucially on direct, timely and non-judgmental communication. Without this, research consistently shows, real change in learning and teaching is very limited.

Ask any school if they have a CPD programme for the staff and the answer will be yes. Each school should have a CPD coordinator but I know of teachers who rarely leave the school for CPD. Funding is included in the overall budget and schools can formulate their own policy. In practice that means that CPD funds may be the first to be reduced in a crisis.

In Holland CPD is supported with good funding and a specific time allocation.

An example of a Dutch teachers annual contracted hours:

Contracted to work 1659

Teaching 498

Marking and preparation 312

Professional development 116 (Teachers have considerable control over how this is exploited)

‘Other tasks’ such as management take up the remaining time.

Teacher are given a more detailed breakdown of their own allocations each year and can apply internally for funding of courses which they select. That is limited but appears to be considerably more generous than is typical in England.

Teachers appear to be more autonomous and have considerable authority when marking examinations for example. There will be a meeting each year at which standards are revisited but then are then left to exchange scripts with a teacher elsewhere in the country. A discussion may take place between them but the marker decides the level.

I asked who moderates the marking – there was silence which I interpreted as disbelief that I would consider that necessary.

Before we leap to a conclusion we may wish to think about what that means for the standard of education. The English system is quality controlled an approach which lends itself to monitoring by numbers, output and league tables. The Dutch system at least in the subject area in question is quality assured there is scope for professional judgement and therefore an onus on the professional not to embarrass himself or his profession. The teacher is the upholder of standards.

Where will you go for a meal? MacDonald’s were you know every aspect of the process meets precisely controlled standards wherever you are in the world or one which has a good reputation even a star rating? That is a star rating awarded by the customers or critics which is an indication of quality with meals as creatively diverse as sushi, Indian or French? I would rather eat where the staff have freedom to innovate and where they have confidence in their product, able to respond to the local clients and create an experience which may be very different from the restaurant next door. The customers decide.

The General Teaching Council are showing the way with their approach to teacher professional development but their are elements which could be included. In the past few years the GTC have reviewed, absorbed and acted  upon some of the latest and best research on the topic.

GTC – “Good teaching needs good networks and good networks need good teachers.”

The regular informal meetings of local teachers have all but disappeared for a variety of reasons. They served to provide social and professional support, an opportunity for practitioners to explain things they had tried and share the successes and failures. That crucial sharing of tacit knowledge helps move the pedagogy on for those who were keen to improve and innovate.

GTC – “The GTC Networks provide support by linking teachers nationally and putting them in touch with the latest research and evidence. They let teachers have a voice at national debates on changes to education.”

Well done for attempting to support networks (others are too) even better that you are feeding research outcomes into the networks. But remember who the real experts are, they are the teachers themselves and to simply “let teachers have a voice” is to deny them professional status. Teachers can and should be leading change, they should be at the centre of the system not hangers-on waiting for instructions. The GTC have the right spirit.

This is particularly crucial now in the current and well financed drive to fundamentally change the the learner framework. The research GTC has seen shows that, for a change of culture to to be achieved, requires the wholehearted and continuing involvement of the practitioners. All agencies should adopt a direct peer relationship with teachers. Their voice should not be filtered by agencies which have a specific government remit. That only reinforces the echo of government policies and direction by dogma rather than informed professionalism.

So should the GTC step aside? Yes, but only in the metaphorical sense. Please GTC carry on but consider these principles for establishing the networks.

• Networks build on social capital but require free and open dialogue in an atmosphere of trust. The GTC also have a disciplinary remit and should not be directly involved in dialogue between practitioners. The GTC need to be there and the practitioners should have the facility to dialogue directly with the GTC when they choose. This applies to other agencies who should also be linked including subject associations. ministries and even relevant companies.

• The practitioners should be required as part of their professional duties be involved in these networks but without that involvement being onerous. It can be done in my view and I’ll explore that in another posting.
• Any network or community requires sensitive, trusted and independent facilitation. I believe this is a role for higher education institutions. Their facilitation role could provide research input, the support of practitioners in research and provide an overview. That symbiotic relationship means neither party would lose touch with either the wider world or the reality of everyday teaching. Even better the practitioners could be rewarded for their contribution to innovation and improvement with academic awards supporting their professional progression and improving their status. This structure offers the prospect of creating a virtuous spiral of increasing social and professional capital for our education system. It also provides a mechanism for the viral sharing of knowledge and expertise.

Hans Hupperetz, headteacher at the Sophianum school in the Netherlands, helped conclude proceedings at the EU e-learning conference in Lisbon. Link to the full plenary session Hans appears after 1h 24 mins. He raised an issue which is easily forgotten as we invest in hardware and change curricula. None of this innovation will work unless teachers are supported in implementing changes to their practice. Research consistently shows that teaching is cultural, we all teach the way we were taught. Changing that culture requires intensive and continuing professional development and support. The technology exists to offer efficient and effective collaboration to achieve this but funding and appropriate arrangements rarely appear in any initiative. The short video of Hans is available at www.futureknowledge.org,