I'm in the process of trying to decide what the focus of my research will be for my dissertation. I know that I want to look at the role of leadership in developing a learning-centred school but I haven't yet decided what exactly I will look at as it is a large topic.
Today I have been reading some examples of action research studies, as I am keen to make my dissertation an action research piece (my last three research papers have been case studies, which while illuminative, and usually lead to improved practiced, are often then left without the follow up I would like to give them, especially when the structure of the Masters means as soon as I finish one paper, I am moving onto the next topic of research). Action research would give me the opportunity, while writing my dissertation to follow through on the cycle of taking action, evaluating and taking further action.
Today I came across a study by a deputy headteacher(Moyra) who had researched her management of staff professional development, who realised, at the end of the first year, that she had provided a top down model of provision of professional development over which the teachers had felt no ownership. This had been the opposite of what she'd intended and completely contrary to what she believes in. SHe has wanted the teachers to be engaged in open-access, self-identified professional development.
This rang some bells. More often than I'd like, I find the outcomes not quite matching up to what I'd intended. Take for example, what I've done this year, in terms of professional development at the school, the management of which is my responsibility. I believe passionately in ongoing professional development - a teacher must first be a learner and building your skills of reflection and evaluation and learning from others is key to improving practice, as well as important personal skills I think everyone should strive for.
At the start of this school year, I embedded monthly training sessions for teachers into the school calendar. The purpose of this was to build a learning culture, in which teachers were engaged in on-going learning. The training sessions were to provide time and space for teachers to come out of their classrooms and share good practice, in a collaborative way. See...good intentions.
From the very start, teachers were encouraged to participate actively in the way these sessions worked. They were consulted about what training topics they would like, they were encouraged to share examples of good practice (self-selected or highlighted in peer/ formal observations), to bring ideas they wanted to discuss and investigate, to share things they were trying in the classroom which were successful or struggling and why etc. and were always asked to provide feedback on the trainings and on anything that they were trying in their classrooms.
My views on the success of this programme - mixed. I have definitely seen evidence of improved teaching and learning as a result of things that have been shared in training sessions and in our mid-year school evaluation the majority of our teachers cited professional development/ training as one of the things management did well.
Yet it is far from what it could be. While teachers checked which topics for future trainings they wanted after one of our early sessions, subsequent emails asking if people had suggestions or requests for the upcoming session went unanswered and invitations to deliver part sessions on specific areas of practice in which they had been identified as strong were declined. Despite applying all the techniques I know for delivering collaborative, fun, interactive sessions, where participants take responsibility for their own learning, the atmosphere was often more like walking through treacle, while I cracked the whip or herded sheep. No matter what I did - using staff examples to illustrate good practice; praising individuals; requesting feedback for how I could do things better - engagement was limited.
I want to know why! If engaged, passionate, reflective and learning teachers are key to successful learning in classrooms, which I believe they are, what makes the difference? What should school leaders be doing to create a work force engaged in their own development for the sake of improving the quality of experience and education we give the children? More than that I want to know what I should be doing in my school.
So that's my goal...what is limiting the success of these practices at our school and what can be done about it?
That's one of the things I am coming to love about my research. I'm learning how to research. I could pick up a book about leadership and good practice in the areas I've discussed, but what if they don't work in my school setting, because every school setting is different and while there are some universal (almost) truths, 'there are plenty of anomalies too, and I'm learning how to seek those out and adjust accordingly.
Today I have been reading some examples of action research studies, as I am keen to make my dissertation an action research piece (my last three research papers have been case studies, which while illuminative, and usually lead to improved practiced, are often then left without the follow up I would like to give them, especially when the structure of the Masters means as soon as I finish one paper, I am moving onto the next topic of research). Action research would give me the opportunity, while writing my dissertation to follow through on the cycle of taking action, evaluating and taking further action.
Today I came across a study by a deputy headteacher(Moyra) who had researched her management of staff professional development, who realised, at the end of the first year, that she had provided a top down model of provision of professional development over which the teachers had felt no ownership. This had been the opposite of what she'd intended and completely contrary to what she believes in. SHe has wanted the teachers to be engaged in open-access, self-identified professional development.
This rang some bells. More often than I'd like, I find the outcomes not quite matching up to what I'd intended. Take for example, what I've done this year, in terms of professional development at the school, the management of which is my responsibility. I believe passionately in ongoing professional development - a teacher must first be a learner and building your skills of reflection and evaluation and learning from others is key to improving practice, as well as important personal skills I think everyone should strive for.
At the start of this school year, I embedded monthly training sessions for teachers into the school calendar. The purpose of this was to build a learning culture, in which teachers were engaged in on-going learning. The training sessions were to provide time and space for teachers to come out of their classrooms and share good practice, in a collaborative way. See...good intentions.
From the very start, teachers were encouraged to participate actively in the way these sessions worked. They were consulted about what training topics they would like, they were encouraged to share examples of good practice (self-selected or highlighted in peer/ formal observations), to bring ideas they wanted to discuss and investigate, to share things they were trying in the classroom which were successful or struggling and why etc. and were always asked to provide feedback on the trainings and on anything that they were trying in their classrooms.
My views on the success of this programme - mixed. I have definitely seen evidence of improved teaching and learning as a result of things that have been shared in training sessions and in our mid-year school evaluation the majority of our teachers cited professional development/ training as one of the things management did well.
Yet it is far from what it could be. While teachers checked which topics for future trainings they wanted after one of our early sessions, subsequent emails asking if people had suggestions or requests for the upcoming session went unanswered and invitations to deliver part sessions on specific areas of practice in which they had been identified as strong were declined. Despite applying all the techniques I know for delivering collaborative, fun, interactive sessions, where participants take responsibility for their own learning, the atmosphere was often more like walking through treacle, while I cracked the whip or herded sheep. No matter what I did - using staff examples to illustrate good practice; praising individuals; requesting feedback for how I could do things better - engagement was limited.
I want to know why! If engaged, passionate, reflective and learning teachers are key to successful learning in classrooms, which I believe they are, what makes the difference? What should school leaders be doing to create a work force engaged in their own development for the sake of improving the quality of experience and education we give the children? More than that I want to know what I should be doing in my school.
So that's my goal...what is limiting the success of these practices at our school and what can be done about it?
That's one of the things I am coming to love about my research. I'm learning how to research. I could pick up a book about leadership and good practice in the areas I've discussed, but what if they don't work in my school setting, because every school setting is different and while there are some universal (almost) truths, 'there are plenty of anomalies too, and I'm learning how to seek those out and adjust accordingly.