Supervision 2: Slight change of course

The Splits by Ian Sane
Attribution License

I came to today’s discussion with a degree of trepidation and some concerns about my study, its focus and research questions that have been rumbling around for a while. I’ve been reading literature on social theory (Archer 1998; Foucault, Bourdieu in Murphy, 2013) theoretical literature on professional learning communities and professional learning(Stoll 2006; Webster-Wright; Watson, 2012); professional learning communities in practice (Coburn,2008; Priestley,2010; Horn & Little, 2009) organisational learning (Boreham & Morgan, 2004, Imants)and methodology literature (Flyvjberg in Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). All of this was within the context of learning rounds as a model of professional learning communities. But I felt I was not getting the right purchase on this literature -something was orbiting around my thoughts looking for a place to land but not finding it.
Last night I attended the Selmas Spring Forum – a most civilised event involving dinner and several speakers on the subject of Transforming Schools – ambition and reality? There was a lot of chat about Learning Rounds at my table and one of the speakers focused on this for her perspective of transforming schools. There is undoubtedly a lot of enthusiasm within the educational community for Learning Rounds – it seems to offer teachers and leaders a workable response to many of the policy and practice imperatives currently circulating. But more and more I am getting the impression that Learning Rounds as they are currently practised are more an event,and less the embodiment of a learning community. This is a hunch – as far as I know it has not been researched. My own research into Learning Rounds focused on protocols and practice, with reference specifically to how the LR was established and what went on at the discussion stage of the process. I don’t see a problem here (except the lack of research) but it does make my approach to the literature so far look a bit off track.
So in discussion today with Mark thoughts started to crystallise a bit. Maybe I should refocus the study onto educational change processes and how policies migrate and refract through the various stages of implementation and interpretation they go through. Learning Rounds would provide an interesting example of this, as a practice which was adapted originally from the medical world, exported, adopted by policy makers, then refracted into different contexts and social practices in schools. Archer’s theory of morphogenesis and morphostasis – how agents act upon structures and change them, resulting in both elements being changed, and this process being repeated over time – affords a framework for a detailed analysis of change processes(this is sketchy – I will need to read much further into this)which fits well with a Learning Rounds-as-travelling policy-or-practice conceptualisation.
So I am going to refocus my reading onto educational change literature, and reframe my questions around aspects of policy intentions and social practices; to what extent are we seeing morphogenetic (or morphostatic) changes in the policy and what effects are these changes having on the social practices involved in Learning Rounds?
Next task – shape up the RQs properly and make a start on the literature review.

ARCHER, M et al.,(ed) 1998. Critical Realism: essential readings

BOREHAM, N. and MORGAN, C., . A sociocultural analysis of organisational learning. Oxford Review of Education, 2004: 30(3), pp. 307-325.

COBURN, C and RUSSELL, J.L.,  District Policy and Teachers’ Social Networks Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis;2008 30; 203

DENZIN, N.K. and LINCOLN, Y.S., eds, 2011. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4 edn. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: SAGE.

MURPHY, M (ed) Social Theory and Education Research. 2013

HORN, I.S. and LITTLE, J.W., 2009. Attending to Problems of Practice: Routines and Resources for Professional Learning in Teachers’ Workplace Interactions. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), pp. 181-217.

IMANTS, J. and VAN VEEN, K., 2009. Teacher Learning as Workplace Learning. In: N. VERLOOP, ed, International Encyclopaedia of Teacher Education. 3 edn.

PRIESTLEY, M. :Schools, teachers and curriculum change: a balancing act. J Educ Change: 2011, 12, 1-23

STOLL, L., BOLAM, R., MCMAHON, A., WALLACE, M. and THOMAS, S., 2006. Professional Learning Communities: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), pp. 221-258.

WATSON, C., 2010. Educational policy in Scotland: inclusion and the control society. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(1), pp. 93-104.

WEBSTER-WRIGHT, A., 2009. Reframing Professional Development Through Understanding Authentic Professional Learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), pp. 702-739.

PhD progress

PhD progress report: 22/04/2013.

Start date: February 2013

I have just started my doctoral study and am in the early stages of literature orientation – looking for signposts in the prescribed literature we have been analysing in doctoral workshop sessions and extrapolating from there into other journals, and other authors which will have relevance for my study.  I have been spending less time on subject –related literature than on the literature around social theory at this stage. Further reading on subject specific themes is my immediate task.

A significant source for social theory so far has been Mark Murphy’s new book on Social Theory and Education research which has helpful and accessible chapters on the main theorists in this field– Foucault, Bourdieu, Derrida, Habermas. Having dabbled a bit in my undergraduate degree with French philosophers (I even went to a Derrida talk in Paris once!) I’m finding it very interesting to revisit them in a more sophisticated context and begin to see ways in which they can relate to my study. Thinking across the readings we have done for our last workshop it is becoming clear that a socio-cultural perspective is a really appropriate theoretical foundation for this study: Vygotskyian understandings of knowledge being culturally mediated through dialogue and relational practices (as in Boreham & Morgan; 2004) within a collective and not only individual context is a useful perspective through which to consider the practice of learning rounds in schools. Anne Edwards’(2006)  paper on relational agency was particularly interesting as it exposed a model of distributed agency based on a version of CHAT activity theory– where multiple agents working together “expanded the object.”  Engestrom is referenced in most of the readings I have come across ( Paavola and Hakkarainen; Edwards;  Boreham & Morgan) so far which seem relevant so this is a thinker whose work I shall further research.

I’m attending a training session in Refworks next week to hopefully settle on a referencing system I can use that is supported by the university so I hope I can export the bits and pieces I have elsewhere in Mendeley and Endnote into it and use one system. I’ve applied for the Doctoral student conference in May and the Summer School in June, so hoping to get some advice from students who are further on in this process and enjoy the wisdom of impressive list of presenters there. There will be tweets and more blogposts!

Boreham *, N. & Morgan, C., 2004. A sociocultural analysis of organisational learning. Oxford Review of Education, 30(3), pp.307–325.

Edwards, A., 2005. Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(3), pp.168–182.

Mark Murphy (University of Glasgow) ed., 2013. Social Theory and Education Research 1st ed., Abingdon: Routledge.

Paavola, S. & Hakkarainen, K., 2005. The Knowledge Creation Metaphor – An Emergent Epistemological Approach to Learning. Science Education, 14(6), pp.535–557.

Schools of inquiry

Reblogged from bluyonder:

In March the NSW Government announced its blueprint for improving schooling.  The action plan includes raising entry requirements for teaching courses at universities and ensuring the quality of initial teacher education is regularly assessed.  This is a positive move.

Attracting the best and the brightest is something that all education systems desire. Yet attracting is one thing, retaining teachers is something else when we continue to operate as Richard Elmore says as a profession without a practice.

Read more… 681 more words

A very interesting commentary on teacher education from Greg Whitby. It seems to be consistent with much of what is recommended by Teaching Scotland's Future in terms of ITE, and it will be interesting to track the parallel developments across the hemispheres. In essence, some would say that the idea of a "mutual transformation agenda" was  at the centre of the Donaldson recommendation for new partnership arrangements between Scottish local authorities and teacher education institutions, but the carving up or sharing of responsibilities for this seem to be as yet unclear. There's no doubt about the increasing availability of outside "experts" ready to dispense their wisdom, and  greater autonomy at school level enables school leaders to tap into this resource, but Greg's point about collegiate working is a good one and it raises a further question of why would teachers consider themselves the best people to educate future teachers if they themselves are often rendered dependent on outside expertise for their own professional development? Schools of inquiry as the basis for TSF partnership agreements? Might be worth considering.

So the hard work begins…..

I got my reading list for the second PhD workshop – not for the faint-hearted I think is first thought that comes to mind. I will be busy ……….

   1. Using Social Theory book:
Sarah Whatmore Investigating the field – introduction pp. 67-69 
Doreen Massey Imagining the field

Assignment: For the Massey chapter, write your responses and questions (max one side of A4) and bring ready to share. This is to be informal, exploratory writing, not a polished essay!

2. Bring one scholarly article or chapter that you are reviewing for your own research. Be prepared to share its overall perspective, key points, and key contribution to your understanding of the literature informing your research.

3. Research question: Come prepared to share your current formulation of the aims and questions guiding your own proposed research.

4. Articles for reading: We will be discussing two themes exploring critical views of knowing and learning through a series of readings, as listed below. Spend time deliberating each piece. Come prepared to discuss it in terms of its key ideas, and its relation to your own thinking and to your research. You might wish to bring your written notes to share in our group dialogues.

 

1. Knowing and learning: critical explorations Paavola, S. and Hakkairnen, K. (2005).
2. The knowledge creation metaphor. Science & Education 14: 535–557Hager, P. Lee, A., and Reich, A. (2012). √
3.  Problematizing practice, reconceptualising learning and imagining change. In Practice, learning, change (pp1-14). Springer. Biesta, G. (2007). Why ‘‘what works’’ won’t work: evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory 57 (1): 2-22 √
4. Butler, J. What is Critique? An Essay on Foucault’s Virtue. pp. 1-20.2.   
5.  Practice, professions, and professional learning: Stronach, I, Corbin, B, McNamara, O, Stark, S and Warne, T (2002).

 

6.  Towards an uncertain politics of professionalism: teacher and nurse identities in flux. Journal of Education Policy, 17(1): 109 – 138 Colley, H, James, D and Diment, K (2007). √

 

7. Unbecoming teachers: towards a more dynamic notion of professional participation. Journal of Education Policy, 22 (2): 173 — 193 Fenwick, T. (2013). √

 

8.  Understanding transitions in professional practice and learning: towards new questions for research. Journal of Workplace Learning. Edwards, A. (2005). 

 

9. Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner. International Journal of Educational Research 43: 168–182. √

 

10. Watson, C. (2012). Effective professional learning communities? The possibilities for teachers as agents of change in schools. British Education Research Journal. √

Teacher Education, Teachers’ Work group

I’m just back from doing a talk at Glasgow University to the TETW group about Learning Rounds. I was very flattered to be asked and the interest was considerable, if attendance at these workshops counts as a reliable indicator. The presentation & references can be found in the SERA bundle in the post below (go for the prezi link for the most recent version).. There was a fairly searching discussion during the session – I’ll try and summarise the main points I can remember below:

Are Learning Rounds of any value at all if the process is non-evaluative? 

Yes – I believe they are because the process is not entirely non-evaluative as they do become evaluative at some point – the next steps stage. One of the straplines in the Instructional Rounds text is  observe-analyse-predict.  It is important to resist the temptation to become evaluative too soon – i.e. before the evidence (from observations) is assembled. Carey made the good point that this is  counter-intuitive, it’s very difficult  not to want to jump in and make assertions – but in LR it is important to make evaluations based on evidence, not inference or opinion. So, it’s not that LRs are never evaluative, but the judgments come at a particular point in the process, and are evidence based.

What we’re doing is based on the LR model but we’ve adapted it and made it our own for our own purposes.

Which is what happens when people think about their context and their practice in the light of new ideas.  This may be a LR or it may be another form of observation – but expectations need to be managed in these circumstances in terms of achievable outcomes.

As an example of policy and process it’s quite revealing that a significant investment and profile can be given to something with a questionable evidence base. LR is referenced in Teaching Scotland’s Future and the NPG recommendations for implementation, but the evidence base seems to be scant.

True – and this is an observation which has been made at previous talks on the subject I’ve given. I think it reinforces the need for empirical evidence to justify policy decisions, and for policy makers to take research more seriously. Meanwhile, I’ll just keep doing what I’m doing and try to grow the evidence base for this practice, which I do believe is valuable.

What’s the impact?

Well, we don’t really know, but as Aileen said – there are lots of things that go on in the name of CPD/Professional Learning/CLPL and we don’t really know what the impact of them is either, so maybe that’s more of a generic question.

There was lots more – I will add to this post if I remember but meanwhile, if you were there and remember or want to comment please do so below – and thanks for your interest!

Round & Round | Harvard Graduate School of Education

Round & Round | Harvard Graduate School of Education.

 

Essential reading for anyone interested in starting a Learning Round. Focus on the language is key!! This reinforces my findings – one and a half years spent  working on  using the descriptive voice before launching into the round for real just shows how important it is to get this bit right. Timescale is another eye-opener here: a years’ worth of observations and debriefings before moving on to the next level of work? Are we rushing things too much? Trying to get it all done in a morning’s observation, afternoon debrief then next steps thrashed out a few weeks later might not be doing the process justice. What’s your view?

Share this:

 

Here’s the prezi on Learning Rounds which formed the basis for my presentation to SERA 2012 on Weds 21st November and some references if anyone is interested. I prefer sharing them this way rather than on paper – I think it gives a better opportunity for engagement so if you’ve got any comments or reflections on any of this please leave a comment and lets start a learning conversation.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (2010). How to Research. Berkshire, England: OUP.

Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Stoll,. L, Thomas, S., Wallace, M., Greenwood, A., Smith, M. (2005). Creating and Sustaining Effective Professional Learning Communities.   Retrieved 18/11/2011, 2011, from http://www.mpn.gov.rs/resursi/dokumenti/dok267-eng-DfES_professional_learning_communities.pdf

Jackson, D. in conversation with Church, M. Cracking the Concrete: reflections on how networks work across, around and within standard structures. Personal correspondence.

Church, M. (2006). Knots and threads: the power of networks. Personal correspondence.

City, E. A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009).Instructional Rounds in Education – A Network Approach to Improving Teaching and Learning (2nd edition). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

Conlon, T. (2004). A Failure of Delivery: the United Kingdom’s New

Opportunities Fund programme of teacher training in information and communications technology. Journal of In-service Education, 30(1), 24; pp115-139.

Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Evans, D., & A, F. (2005). The impact of collaborative CPD on classroom teaching and learning. Review: What do teacher impact data tell us about collaborative CPD? London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.  Retrieved 17/11/2011, 2011, from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=395

Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Rundell, B., & Evans, D. (2003). The impact of collaborative Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

on classroom teaching and learning. Research Evidence in Education Library, 2011(20/11). Retrieved from Eppi Centre website: http://wsassets.s3.amazonaws.com/ws/nso/pdf/09598003e49523abff794962e2752c81.pdf

Denscombe, M. (2010). Ground Rules for Social Research: Guidelines for Good Practice. Berkshire, England: OUP.

Donaldson, G. (2011). Teaching Scotland’s Future: A Review of Teacher Educationin Scotland. Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.

Fraser, Christine , Kennedy, Aileen , Reid, Lesley and Mckinney, Stephen (2007). Teachers’ continuing professional development: contested concepts, understandings and models. Professional Development in Education, 153-169

Fullan, M. (2007). The New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers’ College Press.

Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2010). Professional Learning Communities and System Improvement. Improving Schools, 13(2) pp172 -181:  London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Hoban, G. (2002). Teacher Learning for Educational Change. Buckingham: OUP

Kervin, L., Jan, T., & Phil, F.). Towards Balanced Pedagogy: A model for in-school teacher professional development.  Retrieved 27/11, 2011, from http://conference.nie.edu.sg/paper/Converted%20Pdf/ab00184.pdf

King, N., & Horrocks, C. (2010). An Introduction to interview data analysis: interviews in qualitative research pp. 142 -174. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

National CPD Team. (2010, November 05). Learning Rounds Toolkit. Retrieved 09/01/11 from the National CPD Team blog:  http://ltsblogs.org.uk/cpdteam/2011/02/09/learning-rounds-the-story-grows/

Nelson, Tamara Holmlund and Slavit, David (2007) ‘Collaborative inquiry among science and mathematics teachers in the USA: professional learning experiences through cross-grade, cross-discipline dialogue‘,

Priestley, M. (2011) Schools, teachers and curriculum change: a balancing act? Journal of Educational Change, 12[1]. 1-23

Professional Development in Education, 33: 1, pp. 23 — 39

Noble, D. (2011) Technologies for career-long CPD: a literature review. Personal correspondence

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Ltd.

Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M, & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional Learning Communities:  A Review of the Literature. Journal of Educational Change, (7), 221-258.

Trotman, D. (2009). Networking for Educational Change: concepts, impediments and opportunities for primary school professional learning communities. Professional Development in Education, 35 (3) pp321-340.

Varga-Atkins, T., O’Brien, M., Burton, D., Campbell, A., & Qualter, A. (2010). The importance of interplay between school-based and networked professional development: School professionals’ experiences of inter-school collaborations in learning networks. Journal for Educational Change: (11), 241–272.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge. Boston, M A: Harvard Business School Press.