ideasfarm.net

Imagine a group of schools determined to adapt to the rapidly changing and unpredictable demands of the 21st century. Recognising, that together, they can benefit by pooling ideas and resources. Accepting that teachers need to be empowered to innovate and be reflective professionals, constantly reviewing their practice.

At ease in a constant cycle of review and improvement or ‘perpetual beta’.

Determined as institutions to embark on joint curriculum innovation and enlightened pedagogy, focused on citizenship with a global perspective.

Imagine being invited to join that group to facilitate their founding conference and provide an overview of how technology can enable that vision. I was, and I am still smiling. The experience was exhilarating.

It was a three day conference in the Netherlands. School leaders and partnership coordinators representing schools across Europe, including Germany, Holland, Belgium, Lithuania and Romania, met with a determination to establish a deep and long-term collaboration. Schools in Turkey, England and Sicily could not attend but asked to be considered in the plans. Each school had a further global network of schools which cooperate on exchanges and other activities.
The focus is on European citizenship but with some exciting twists including international enterprise and entrepreneurship. This group, with huge potential, recognises the role of continuing professional development in transforming education. They are keen to extend teacher job shadowing teacher exchange and international student work experience.

The principle of distributed leadership and shared responsibility was accepted as necessary to achieve the objectives. Too many projects have failed when key staff have moved on. This conference, crucially, included headteachers and coordinators who could commit to a long term and enduring relationship on behalf of their schools. They also acknowledge that all stakeholders need to be consulted, informed and engaged in the process - parents, teachers, students and not forgetting education officials and politicians.

With all these connections the possibility of creating a robust networked cluster system, for sharing expertise ‘virally’, becomes a possibility.

This group need and deserve support to establish this relationship which could be a model for others to emulate. Please contact me if you can offer sponsorship of any kind or know of an organisation that may.

Some key issues arise here.

How do we accredit and reward practitioners who rise to this challenge?

When students seek, as they are, to personalise their experience and access part of their education from an international source how is that to be funded and accredited?

Where is the accreditation system and agile structure to support this? I have some ideas, so do these schools and they have the vision. I hope I can be useful.

At last common sense and not a little research evidence has prevailed. The proposal to increase CPD is the single best investment a government can make in education. Now please don’t waste the opportunity.

Scattered among the excellent conclusions of this report are some preconceptions based on a failed historical model which I hope will not survive as regulations.

“Twenty days” is seriously good provision. I hope that carries the postcript ‘of funding’ which would enable some creative innovation in approach to flourish.

“Course” Please stop talking ‘courses’. Courses are notorious for failing to result in impact UNLESS they are followed up with refreshers, reflection and dialogue between practitioners of mutual respect. The practitioners already embody a huge and largely untapped reservoir of experience, intuition and knowledge. They are professionals let’s respect them and recognise their contribution. Better still reward those who do support others

“decisions … taken away from schools and given to teachers” Teachers will not have true professional status until they are in control of their own standards and professional learning. It is not healthy for the teacher or the employer if the school controls ‘what’ and ‘how’ or even the ‘when’ of all professional development which takes place. I would like to see teachers take a wider global view of professional development. There are many good things happening in other countries from which we can learn. Some enlightened schools already encourage that by supporting teacher visits abroad.

“…making it compulsory for all teachers to watch colleagues teach four times a term.” First define ‘watch’ and then justify the number. Lets stop dictating and start recommending. Learning from other teachers is essential but leave the how and how often, as if it were a course, to creative teachers. This need not be a rigidly defined serial activity. It is possible with existing technology, for teachers to actually work with others continuously.

“Money would go to individual teachers who would select their own courses, conferences or visits for 10 days of external training every year.”

Replace “courses, conferences or visits” with ‘professional development activity’. Then this looks very much like the Dutch model which I admire. See what I mean about learning from others, globally?

“could create financial challenges for schools paying for cover.” and
Derek Davies, head of Stretford High, Manchester, said: “I agree with the principle of more training but increasing it to 20 days a year is just not going to be practical. It isn’t a problem that more money for extra cover would remedy; it is the break in the consistency of teaching that can be damaging for pupils.”

Both of these statements assume the method of operation will be based on traditional practice. The principle of more CPD is good but we need a ‘can-do’ attitude and an open mind. It can be done, other countries do it. Our country, our teachers and our students need deserve a better CPD approach.

I drafted the blog comment below several months ago but didn’t publish it. As you will gather from previous posts it’s topic I feel strongly about.

“Shirley Williams was the first Secretary of State for education to suggest that teachers should have guaranteed professional development time. Ken Baker claimed to deliver it by removing 5 days of school holidays for teachers. They are still called ‘B’ days (bidets) by older staff. Funding for PD has increased in the past decade. It was once ring fenced but is now subsumed in school budgets. The reality is that many staff will have limited opportunity to engage with their peers beyond their own school environment. To share ideas, discuss tactics and describe impacts. We have broadband for ICT but only a narrow band system for the sharing of tacit and explicit knowledge by professionals. England does not take PD seriously.”

My spirits lifted when I read this report heralding Institute for Public Policy Research in the Times Educational Supplement

There are a number of key points:

• will recommend that all teachers receive 20 days in-service training per year.
• decisions about what course they go on taken away from schools and given to teachers
• The IPPR will also recommend that responsibility for in-service training budgets is taken away from schools and given to the Training and Development Agency for schools (TDA).
• once a child’s background was taken into account, the quality of their teacher was the single most important factor determining the pupil’s performance
• It recommends making it compulsory for all teachers to watch colleagues teach four times a term
• Money would go to individual teachers who would select their own courses, conferences or visits for 10 days of external training every year.
• could create financial challenges for schools paying for cover.
• Derek Davies, head of Stretford High, Manchester, said: “I agree with the principle of more training but increasing it to 20 days a year is just not going to be practical. It isn’t a problem that more money for extra cover would remedy; it is the break in the consistency of teaching that can be damaging for pupils.”

See my next posting for comment on these points.