Teacher Journey (part 2) - Career-Long Professional Learning through Practitioner Enquiry

The Career-Long Professional Learning standard is an aspirational standard that challenges practitioners to signpost their professional learning in a way that is unique to them. The CLPL, alongside the Standard for Registration and the Standard for Leadership and Management are all underpinned by the themes of values, sustainability and leadership, and can be used throughout a teachers’ career to support their professional learning.

The OECD (2105) report describes the CLPL standard as supporting practitioners to develop “decisional capital”, which is the “deliberate development of judgement and expertise over time” through a commitment to continual professional learning, informed by their own practice and research. Teachers make judgements on a minute by minute basis, these judgements have their basis in ‘new, unique and concrete situations’ and should be considered through the lens of impact on student outcomes. The appropriateness of what and how teachers teach and organise the learning is important, not only for the immediate impact but also the long term impact on learning. All of these pragmatic judgements brings into question the ‘what works’ agenda, where evidence based strategies ‘tell’ teachers what they should do but unless critically viewed, they can discount that situation of the student and their need to learn content with purpose but also this happens through the relationship between pupil and teacher.. ‘What works’ can be considered as a process and practice, rather than communication and encounter and does not take into consideration ‘what works’ for whom, where and when.

Through the application of the CLPL standard practitioners are challenged to reframe the agenda and shape the notion of what a ‘good teacher’ is in Scotland. As there is no consensus in the literature around what makes a ‘good teacher’, the GTCS Standards provide teachers with a framework to move towards an agreed definition in Scotland as to the values, knowledge, skills and abilities that we, as the teaching profession, think makes a ‘good teacher’. This evolving concept of what it is to be a ‘good teacher’ requires teachers to be “active agents in their own professional worlds” Sachs (2003). Being an ‘active agent’ or ‘activist’ a term coined by Sachs, (2003) requires teachers to work collaboratively and take risks. The professional learning undertaken by teachers as they evolve into enquiry practitioners must be part of a learning journey, where opportunities to work together and to ask questions of their own practice and indeed the practice of others, needs to be promoted and supported. This is high on the agenda for Scottish education and must remain so if we are to be true to the aspiration of a learning profession, but where so often as Sachs (2003) states “student learning is a goal, the continuing learning of teachers is often overlooked”.  Although there is not consensus, Sachs (2003) argues that undertaking practitioner enquiry can “act as an important source of teacher and academic professional renewal and development”. Practitioner enquiry as part of a teacher professional learning journey can be planned for and undertaken to support professional growth.

Practitioner enquiry is seen as a vehicle to promote research by supporting teachers to engage with theory, policy and practice within their own local environment and is congruent with the act of ‘becoming’. It should lead to deep transformative learning which significantly informs and influences a professionals’ understanding, practice and impact on pupil experiences. Hargreaves (1999) argues that schools and teachers should be knowledge creators, thus accepting teachers as researchers. This point is echoed by Darling-Hammond and Sykes (1999:256) who state that

“the classroom and the school occupy a crucial place in teachers’ professional growth. It matters how the school organises and promotes teacher’ work and teacher learning”. 

The purpose of any research activity should be related to increasing skills, knowledge or practice of the teacher but also linked to improved outcomes for learners. Linking teacher learning to student outcomes is a way to promote and engage educators in research through practitioner enquiry, Timperley et al (2009) states  “[if] teachers can gain an understanding of what it is they need to learn to improve outcomes for students and have a compelling reason to engage” in practitioner enquiry.

Practitioner enquiry as a form of professional learning, allows teachers the space to engage with research and create their own knowledge, which is very pertinent to their students in their situation. Even more powerful yet is being part of an enquiring community, where all data and evidence is given consideration and the reliance on test scores and ‘what works’ is included but critically reviewed to establish the best path for the establishment, at that time, to support student learning. When a community becomes an enquiring community it opens up the possibility to challenge assumptions, to articulate values, to ask questions of their practice and to form partnerships with academics to engage in theory and research to further enhance the life chances of their students.

So through practitioner enquiry as a means of professional learning, practitioners can address the needs of their own learning so than they can better support student attainment and achievement.

References

Darling-Hammond, L. Sykes, G. (eds) (1999) Teaching as the Learning Profession; Handbook of Policy and Practice. Jossey-Bass. San Fransisco

Hargreaves, D. (1999) The Knowledge-Creating School. British Journal; of educational Studies, 47(2), 122-144

Improving Schools in Scotland: An OECD Perspective (2015)

http://www.oecd.org/edu/Improving-Schools-in-Scotland-An-OECD-Perspective.pdf

Accessed last : 16 February 2016

Sachs, J. (2003) The Activist Teaching Profession. Open University Press

Timperley, H.S. Parra, J.M. Bertanees, C.  (2009)  Promoting professional inquiry for improved outcomes for students in New Zealand Professional Development in Education Volume 35, Issue 2 pp227-245)  

Teacher Journey (Part 1) -Teacher Professionalism

Teacher professionalism, being professional or being part of a profession are widely used in literature and policy statements in Scotland. However, have we as a ’profession’ ever stopped the think what does this means? Do we all have a similar definition? Or are there distinct and competing definitions? The discourse around professionalism is not helpful as there is also contention in the literature around the meaning of ‘profession’ and ‘professionalism’, it is acknowledged by Kennedy, Barlow & Macgregor that these concepts are “multifaceted”  and “contested” ( (2012:4).

Here are some definitions of professional.

From Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary

The competence or skill expected of a professional or the practising of an activity, especially a sport, by professional rather than amateur players.

The Australian Council of Professionals 2004

A profession is a disciplined group of individuals who adhere to ethical standards and uphold themselves to, and are accepted by, the public as possessing special knowledge and skills in widely recognised body of learning derived from research, education and training at a high level and who are prepared to exercise this knowledge and these skills in the interest of others

Business Dictionary

Person formally certified by a professional body of belonging to a specific profession by virtue of having completed a required course of study and/or practice. A person whose competence can usually be measured against an established set of standards or a person who has achieved an acclaimed level of proficiency in a calling or trade.

So, “Is professionalism a ‘thing’ or is it a process? I would argue that it has meaning in both descriptions. The ‘thing’ as a static element for me would be the suite of standards held by GTCS for all practitioners in Scotland. In addition, the Code of Professionalism and Conduct which outlines the characteristics and code of conduct which the individual complies with, to uphold to the status of themselves as a credible professional and also the profession in holistic terms, in the sense of what ‘we’ stand for and this is how ‘we’ behave.

Next, a question asked by Kennedy, Barlow & Macgregor (2012:4) “Is professionalism owned by individual professionals or is it owned by the entire occupational group?” Again I would argue that this is a false dichotomy and the real answer lies within both the individual and the collective. Teachers have a responsibility to meet expected standards, set by themselves but this must also be within the realms of what is perceived to be acceptable within the ‘profession’ and the public as stated in the definition from the Australian Council of Professionals (above).

Finally, Kennedy, Barlow & Macgregor(2012:4)  also posed this question “Is professionalism something that provides strength, identity and a moral compass for an occupational group or is it something that can be used on or against the professional group as a means of exerting external influence and control?” The idea of a moral compass, is idealistic but does chime with the ideal of vocational purpose which is often aligned with teaching. The second part of the definition is more about a control mechanism, where the use of the term ‘professionalism’ has become a tool to shape education policy.

Models of professionalism

Sachs (2001) distinction of professionalism, which was then extended by Whitty (2008), discussed a “spectrum” of professionalism with the polar extremes being managerial and democratic. Whitty (2008) extended this to a four model structure;

TRADITIONAL

The traditional model is discussed as being more led by a list of characteristics and a code of conduct.

MANAGERIAL

The managerial model as discussed by Kennedy, Barlow & Macgregor involves professionalism being used as a means of “control over teacher behaviour” (2012:3) There is an expectation of “compliance”, and professionalism is measured using targets with business influenced criteria, led by “externally imposed concept and accountability” (Kennedy, Barlow & Macgregor, 2012).

DEMOCRATIC

Democratic professionalism is described as being the “enactment of principle of equality and social justice” (Kennedy, Barlow & Macgregor, 2012)an internal autonomy model which is “critical, politically engaged and [a] proactive attempt to promote social justice through professional actions”

Each model has its own strengths and issues dependant on whose lens you are using to scrutinise them.

COLLABORATIVE

The final model is the Collaborative model in which Whitty (2008) talks about “the growing emphasis on inter-professional working”.

The Scottish Context

The challenge for education profession is that teacher identity in Scotland is currently being re-conceptualized.  A new kind of professionalism is evolving which Evetts (2012) describes as a ‘hybrid professionalism’, encompassing the professional wish for empowerment, innovation and autonomy but recognizes the public interest need for quality assurance and accountability. This involves teachers as practitioners becoming more research enriched and engaging in enquiry, which can lead to transformative learning and is congruent with the act of ‘becoming’, Sachs (2003). By offering guidance on practitioner enquiry GTCS supports the Cochrane-Smith & Lyttle (2009) disposition of ‘enquiry as stance’ where GTCS challenges practitioners to question their practice and adopt an ‘critical habit of mind”.

From a presentation delivered at the ICSEI conference in Glasgow 2016, Finn discussed a good professional;

Delivers a good service to those who rely on their professionalism and....on their skills, knowledge and expertise being up to date and relevant to their need.

Professional practices involves more than just delivering what the ‘client’ thinks they want. It goes beyond delivery as the professional also influences and to some extent shapes the client expectation. The client/professional relationship creates a transactional basis to the relationship and becomes more accountability driven rather than values based. Biesta (2010) argues that we have moved into a bureaucratic rather than democratic culture of accountability systems where we come to value what we can easily measure, data, rather than measuring what we really value, learning.

Finally we can refer to a list of characteristics adapted from Burbules and Dennison (1991) by Finn & Hamilton (2012) to help us to identify what we may mean by a teaching professional in 2016.

A teaching professional will;

• o    have clearly defined practical and theoretical knowledge
• o    have professional autonomy and accountability
• o    prioritisation of service to others before economic benefits
• o    be commitment to keep learning and improving throughout a career
• o    have aspirations towards optimal learning performance
• o    collaborate with other professionals

 So I would say we that we haven’t got to an agreed working definition yet, but perhaps with Teacher Professionalism as a key driver within the National Improvement Framework, we as a ‘profession’ have an opportunity to define what we mean by professionalism and the values that underpin our contribution to young people’s lives in Scotland.

Bibliography

Biesta, G.J.J.  (2010) Good Education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy: Boulder and London: Paradigm

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S.L. (2009) Inquiry as Stance: practitioner Research for the Next Generation, New York:Teachers College Press

Evetts, J. (2012) Professionalism in Turbulent time: Changes, Chellenges and opportunties Keynote Presentation to professional Practice and Learning (proPEL) Conference, University of Stirling 9 may 2012 http://www.propel.stir.ac.uk/downloads/JuliaEvetts-FullPaper.pdf

Kennedy, A. Barlow, W. MacGregor, J. (2012) ‘Advancing Professionalism in Teaching’? An exploration of the mobilisation of the concept of professionalism in the McCormac Report on the Review of Teacher Employment in Scotland, Scottish Education Review 44 (2) 3-13

Sachs, J. (2001) Teacher professional identity: competing discourses, competing outcomes. Journal of Education Policy, 16(2), 149-161.

Sachs, J. (2003) The Activist Teaching Profession, Buckingham : Open University Press.

Whitty, G. (2008) Changing modes of teacher professionalism: traditional, managerial, collaborative and democratic. In: B. Cunningham, ed. Exploring Professionalism: 28-49. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

Scottish Attainment Challenge – support for practitioners

The Education Scotland website has a range of support information to help practitioners to engage with the Scottish Attainment Challenge through the National Hub. The National Hub support practitioners with information, blogs and social media and through an online community. The research and evidence pages within the Scottish Attainment Challenge area of the website aims to help practitioner engage with current research by supporting the “effective translation of knowledge into action within the Scottish Education system”.

Two research briefing papers have been produced both focus on ‘closing the gap’. The first research briefing paper was published in November 2015 and is entitled “Differentiated Learning in Numeracy and Mathematics”, the second was published earlier this month and discusses “Early Reading”. The research briefings were created using current thinking and literature and are intended to be used as a useful starting point for further research by practitioners. Here, I will give a brief summary of each research briefing paper.

Differentiated Learning in Numeracy and Mathematics (November 2015)

Differentiation provides a means to try to ‘close the gap’ in numeracy and mathematics, however, practitioners need to take cognisance of social factors as well as academic attainment. The impact of socio-economic factors on students attainment and achievement is complex, but as an education system, we need to, “view children and families living in poverty in terms of their possibility and promise rather than their deficiencies” (Ciuffetelli Parker, 2015). Heacox (2002) described differentiated learning as “one dimension of equitable teaching” which can be used to alleviate disengagement and reduce barriers to education, thus helping to ‘close the gap’.

Differentiation is not a single approach but provides a foundation on which all teachers can develop multiple starting points and learning journeys for their learners. Effective teachers differentiate through a variety of different strategies to meet the needs of their learners and involves teachers adapting the learning and teaching, and assessment strategies. These strategies can include making changes to accommodate learners needs by differentiating learning through changes to content, modification of process, or adapting the learning environment to meet the needs of all students’. Differentiation, effective assessment and monitoring of students progress are paramount in supporting teachers make professional judgements about the learners’ progress and next steps in their learning journey.

The challenge for teachers and schools remain the same for every change in practice; time, skills and resources. It has been argued that the time spent on differentiation, supports student learning and thus alleviates the need for interventions later in the students’ school career. Teachers need to be supported through strong leadership and high quality professional learning, including collaborative working in order to make improvements to support student outcomes and ‘close the gap’.

Early Reading (February 2016)

In ‘closing the gap’ in reading, it is important to acknowledge that this is a complex issue. Research has consistently reported that children from more disadvantaged backgrounds find reading more difficult and that this gap can be identified in pre-school children (Buckingham et al., 2014). Further evidence suggests that parental education and the influences of home learning (Hartas, 2013) also have a substantial impact on the gap between the readiness of children to become readers.

In order to become a successful reader, children must learn a number of interconnected skills. Hattie (2007) offers the ‘five pillars’ of good reading to be phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. The Education Endowment Foundation (2015a) suggests that it is more important to match the strategy for learning phonics to the needs of the individual than having a blanket approach to teaching phonics. This research also suggests that for young readers a phonic based approach, as part of a balanced reading programme, gives the most effective learning experiences for children.

Ellis (2015) noted, that there are a number of factors that can support disadvantaged students to become better readers. These include challenging classroom environments and learning opportunities that promote literacy and match pupil’s needs. To help reduce the attainment gap, students’ need to have high quality learning and teaching experiences and to be supported by targeted programmes or one to one support as and when required.

In conclusion, ‘closing the gap’ is very challenging and complex. All learning relies on high quality learning and teaching but within the Scottish Attainment Challenge there is a particular focus on learners from more disadvantages backgrounds. Practitioners need to ensure that they are delivering high quality learning and teaching opportunities, that engage students and that they have the skills and resources to do so. Practitioners also have to undertake regular effective monitoring of individual progress and to make professional judgements about the support each pupil needs in order to help them be successful learners.

Both research briefing papers can be found here:

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/inclusionandequalities/sac/nationalhubforscottishattainmentchallenge/research/researchbriefings.asp

Creating economic capital through knowledge building

‘If you think education is expensive, you should try ignorance’

It has been argued that all human learning was an ‘epistemic’ or ‘knowledge building’ activity and definitely social, so learning is not only for the individual but also creates economic growth for the community. This social dimension cannot account for all learning, as some ‘knowledge building’ cannot be achieved through experience alone, such as the development of concepts, which can take learners beyond their own experiences, cannot be developed in a ‘hands on manner’.  Bandura argues that learning is a cognitive process that takes place in a social context and can occur purely through observation or direct instruction. If human knowledge is not recognised as a knowledge building activity which involves epistemic and social knowledge then we create the false dichotomy of the skills and knowledge debate. In this debate, knowledge is often equated with facts rather than concepts which confuses the issue. If the skills versus knowledge debate is rephrased as ‘knowing how’ and ‘knowing that’ then it becomes apparent that they are interdependent. This ties in with educators such as Dewey and Piaget who through looking at how we learn, came to understand that knowledge building and experiential learning are strongly linked and thus their emphasis on experience-based learning.

UNSECO (1996) defines the four pillars of learning to be ‘learning to know’, learning to do’, ‘learning to be’ and ‘learning to live together’. These pillars now need to be re-integrated taking account of the new social dynamics created by the use of the internet, as a source of information and as a community builder. Social networks tends to be built by people with similar values and in these social networks ‘groupthink’ can become prevalent, thus increasing intolerance to those with different value systems and beliefs. It is easy to avoid those with differing values in the virtual world and thus society is splitting into ‘incompatible public spaces’ where it is easy to excommunicate an individual with the click of an ‘unfriend’ button. Not only is the digital age changing our social dynamics but also the way we learn. As information has become more available to society and everyone is encouraged to be creators of knowledge, we have moved from transmission of knowledge to being more about sharing and creating knowledge. Thus ‘learning to know’ has changed to accommodate the use of technology and we need to work harder on ‘learning to be’ and ‘learning to live together’ in a rapid paced and changing society.

So what do this mean for schools and learning?

The launch in 2014 of the Developing the Young Workforce Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy signposted the investment of the Scottish government, in growing the number of opportunities for young people to be involved in “work-based learning which is valued by both employers and young people” (p5). This context dependent (vocational) learning serves a different purpose from context-independent (academic) learning, and is also different in structure by being more spontaneous by the learning within the work place, rather than a more prescribed curriculum. Context dependent learning has over time proved itself more successful to support skills development. The opportunities to develop skills on-the-job are valued but in the digital age, less apprenticeships were available for school leavers, thus a key performance indicator of Developing the Young Workforce is to increase the number of modern apprenticeships available for students transitioning from secondary school.

Context dependent learning as part of an apprenticeship could be considered a form of collaborative enquiry. The apprentice immerses themselves in an active learning environment and within this they experience learning and methodology to achieve relevant outcomes. Learners then explore and undertake critical reflection of their experiences so they can apply this learning in new contexts. This process can be described in the following questions;

·         What do I want to ask?

·         What am I going to do?

·         What happened?

·         What’s important?

·         What work for me?

In contrast to context-dependent learning, in creating context-independent (academic) learning opportunities which allows learners to move beyond their everyday context and helps them to think conceptually, could be described as one of the purpose of schools.

A second purpose of school could lie within the transmission of knowledge through organisation of knowledge (curriculum) and giving knowledge context so it builds on schema (pedagogy).

‘Learning to do’ is no longer about acquisition and internalisation of practical knowledge; instead, it is about the ability to create and invent practically relevant knowledge. Epistemic literacy and critical thinking requires active knowledge creation and innovation. Knowledge can be contemplated in two domains. New knowledge; which could be considered as research and transmission of knowledge, which can be thought of as acquisition of specialised knowledge, and epistemic literacy; which is using both new knowledge and specialist knowledge to understand, integrate and create meaning which allows us to make sense of the world. Contexts for knowing i.e. the systems and structures that support learning, will become reconstructed but in the absence of epistemic literacy, i.e. critical reflective, we can be held hostage to ‘dogmas, orthodoxies and fashions’ of the time.

So if human learning requires both context-dependent and context-independent learning then schools must evolve to accommodate both. In the foreword of Developing the Young Workforce, then Cabinet Secretary for Fair Work, Skills & Training, Roseanna Cunningham MSP states that Scotland needs “a fundamental examination of how we provide, promote, and value a range of learning which leads to a wide variety of jobs.” Supporting students to build economic capital through a variety of learning opportunities, whether that is vocational or academic learning is crucial to developing successful learners who can become effective contributors in Scotland.

References

Bandura – Social Learning Theory

http://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html

Biesta, G. (2015) what is education for? On Good Education, Teacher Judgement and Educational Professionalism; European Journal of Education, Vol 50, No 1

Developing the Young Workforce: Scotland’s Youth Employment Strategy; Implementing the Recommendations of the Commission for Developing Scotland’s Young Workforce

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/Images/DYWResponseYouthEmpl%20Strategy_tcm4-853595.pdf

Monne, X.P. (2015) What is learning for? The Promise of a Better Future; European Journal of Education, Vol 50, No 1

Tuomi, I (2015) Epistemic Literacy or a Clash of Clans? A capability-bsed Veiw on the Furture of learning and Education; European Journal of Education, Vol 50, No 1

UNSECO (1996) Learning: The treasure within (Paris, UNSECO)

Young, M. (2015) what is learning and Why Does it matter? ; European Journal of Education, Vol 50, No 1

Spirals of Inquiry

Doing some reading about enquiry models, I had previously read about the ‘Spirals of Inquiry’ model. I attended a presentation at the ICSEI conference in January and was absolutely blown away with the presentation by Judy Halbert and Linda Kaser who delivered a session entitles ‘Knowledge exchange through inquiry networks: A BC perspective’. The book co-authored by Halbert and Kaser entitled “Spirals of Inquiry: for equity and equality” can be an informant to the Scottish context as the new narrative for Curriculum for Excellence in evolving to Curriculum for Excellence and Equity (CfEE). This enquiry model supports the aspirations of CfEE to inspire our young people to develop skills which will allow them to move forward in making their dreams a reality supported by enquiring practitioners. Learners need to remain curious and as Halbert and Kaser said at the presentation “all learners should leave more curious than they arrived”. As Halbert and Kaser state (p20);

”What is especially important from an equity perspective is that vulnerable learners experience the greatest positive impact in terms of both increased motivation and depth of learning”.

In order to realise our aspirations for our young people the teaching workforce must also be life-long learners and not just pay lip service to this. Practitioners should be curious about learning and think of themselves as “designers of learning” (p37) and how this can be transferred to learners through their teaching pedagogy to facilitate skills and knowledge development.

One of the key factors that affects young people’s learning ability is the belief that they can! Every young person needs a cheerleader, someone who is explicit in communicating positive belief and helping young people to develop resilience both as an individual but also resilience in their learning. Through being more resilient, young people can then develop a more independent way of learning, becoming agents of their own learning, and are confident they can learn and comment on the learning of others. This growth mindset stance is not only applicable for young people but also applies to practitioners, who must be willing to become an ‘adaptive expert’, Timperley (2011) and continually identify and modify their research enriched practice when needed to respond to the needs of their learners. Halbert and Kaser also discuss Timperley’s argument that engaging in inquiry and knowledge building cycles is one of the key ways to develop adaptive expertise and is at the core of professionalism (p63).

Having an ‘enquiry as stance’ Cochrane-Smith & Lyttle (2009) helps teachers to develop a deep understanding of the experiences of their learners and use this as the basis for informed professional learning. Professional learning for practitioners should be our core business, driven by learners needs as enquiry practitioners “allow for a range of outcomes and keep searching for increased understanding and clarity” (p11). Professional learning needs to be of high quality and includes time for practitioners to engage in professional dialogue so as to shape new knowledge and come to new understandings. Although attending conferences, workshops and events can help us reframe our understanding and perhaps give us insight into current educational thinking, professional learning has to be more than this. It has to support the practitioner in creating professional knowledge by engaging with new information that challenges their assumption and perhaps long held beliefs and supports the creation of new meanings. This can be a transformative experience as the old ways of learning and teaching are replaced by new research enriched pedagogy which is learner centric.

The ‘Spirals of Inquiry’ lays out an approach which helps practitioners to be focused on the pursuit of quality learning experiences for young people by asking questions of one’s own practice. The process of the ‘Spirals of Inquiry’ has six steps which overlap but at each step the following questions should be asked;

What’s going on for our learners?

How do we know?

Why does this matter?

 The first two questions keep the learners at the heart of the inquiry and the last question helps to ground the inquiry team as Halbert and Kaser state “productive inquiry focussed teams don’t rush”(p48).

 

The steps of the Spirals of Inquiry process are as follows;

1.    Scanning

The scanning phase involves collecting a variety of rich evidence and considering useful information in key areas of learning.

2.    Focusing

This phase is about gaining greater clarity about the situation for learners before deciding on a course of action. This involves listening to all the stakeholders in the situation to understand the differing perspectives before committing to actions.

3.    Developing a hunch

Developing a hunch involves reflecting on the ways in which professional practice may be contributing to the situation for the learners. It requires the team to stand back and take stock of the key driver in the situation for learners.

4.    New professional learning

This is the phase that advocates that practitioners should engage with research, as Halbert and Kaser state “the best innovation education solutions often draw on what is already known to develop something new that is consistent with sound theory and evidence” (p55). There are challenges within this phase which include ensuring that all practitioners have sufficient time to engage in new learning and that the professional learning is linked directly to their context with their learners in mind.

5.    Taking action

Taking action is the phase that everyone has been itching to get to. It is the jumping across the knowing-doing gap and trying out new practice with plenty of opportunity built in for dialogue, observation, reflection and the opportunity to take risks and learn from mistakes.

6.    Checking

The final phase of checking is the time to check that the difference made was ‘good’. The inquiry can only be thought of as ‘good’ if learner outcomes have improved. The key is to have a general agreement ahead of time about what evidence to look for and what constitutes enough of a difference, therefore using performance standards in both the scanning phase and the checking phase makes a lot of sense.  This phase is also the time for personal reflection for practitioners, who should think about what went well? What could have gone better and why? Then celebrate their achievements and work out how to build on these.

Sustained enquiry matters so practitioners can support young people get the best learning experiences possible. This also helps practitioners to continually evaluate and adapt their practice driven by the learning needs of the young people they work with. For this to be successful the enquiry teams need to be supported by their leadership teams but it would also be beneficial if they created a micro-network in Scotland to support each other. These enquiries would have to have a clear focus and purpose but can also be supported through advice from GTCS.

The Spirals of Inquiry network has a website which can be used for further information, http://noii.ca/spiral-of-inquiry/

 References

Halbert, J. & Kaser, L. (2013) Spirals of Inquiry – for equity and quality:The BC Principals & Vice Principal Association : Vancouver

Third Spaces

“Strengthen evaluation and research, including independent knowledge creation”

The above recommendations from the OECD report (2015) has had me thinking about partnership working, collaborations which has led me to the theory of the ‘third space'.

There can be tensions between academic researchers and the teaching profession as practitioner researchers when working in partnership or collaboration, for example, Who’s agenda take precedent? Who owns the new knowledge? This has led me to think about the creation of ‘third spaces’ (or hybrid spaces’) which will allow academic researchers and practitioner researchers to work together in a more sustainable way.

In order to overcome the tensions in the relationship between academic researchers and practitioner researchers, Hulme et al. (2009) have discussed the use of ‘third spaces’. ‘Third spaces’ redefine the professional stances of the academic researcher and practitioner researcher, and challenge the ‘established hegemonies’ and ‘competing cultural traditions’. Partnerships that currently exist between academic researchers and practitioner researchers can be successful, however, if we are to truly become research informed, we have to move beyond partnerships to create collaborative working spaces.

This notion of a ‘third space’ has been explored by many researchers. Soja (1996:57) developed the theory of ‘third space’ which was then used by Moje et al (2004:42) to conclude that through ‘third space’ activities ‘new knowledges’ can be generated.  Hulme et al. (2009) talk about the ‘third space’ as providing a “platform on which professionals from a variety of backgrounds can relate to each other at different levels of conversational complexity” (p538). Thus it can be considered as a ’neutral space’ and moving into this ‘neutral space’ allows academic researchers and practitioner researchers to challenge their own assumptions and to enquire into the unfamiliar. However, this can only be achieved as Hulme et al state (2009:541) “after social and individual identities have been partially surrendered or altered”. Hulme et al go on to discuss how identities of self are challenged as the partner researchers adopt a language of co-operation and collaboration, and the “co-construction of knowledge” (p539). This gives rise to an opportunity for the researchers to move “beyond ‘using reflective dialogue’ to ‘using generative dialogue’” Scharmer (2001). Hulme et al (2009:541) continue to say that ‘third spaces’ offers researchers a “safe, secure and supportive” place that “stands between the formal areas of practice”, offering places for collaboration and joint working to achieve the aims of the enquiry. Thus the ‘third space’ allows the researchers to reassess their usual ways of working and interacting and creates a joint working space to develop an ‘expanded professionalism’ moving beyond ‘silo thinking’ into a more collaborative co-creation. Zeichner (2010:92) describes this moving beyond their usual sphere as a “transformational setting” and so leads to closer collaboration with a common purpose, which then leads to a shared discourse.

So how do we create ‘third spaces’ for academic and practitioner researchers to co-create knowledge to support a more research enriched profession? Is there a case for a mediator who straddles the academic and professional worlds to support the creation and maintenance of the ‘third space’? Could this be a role for national bodies, professional associations or other independent bodies?

Once the third space is created how do we proceed? What ‘new knowledge’ do we need to create? The shared purpose of the ‘third space’ will help researches to build understanding and champion expansive learning.

What are the rules and norms of ‘third space’? How do we leave our histories at the door so we can co-create ‘new knowledge’? These will have to be negotiated in each unique ‘third space’ with each researcher compromising to support the shared purpose but without losing themselves and their experiences.

How do we share this ‘new knowledge’? Technologies already exist that would allow sharing of ‘new knowledge’ but we must never forget that teachers are ‘time poor’ and thus new knowledge needs to be expressed in ways that promotes the benefits of engaging with research in manageable packages.

‘Third space’ working can build on partnership working and move it to the next level. Although this appears straightforward, this co-creation of new knowledge in ‘third spaces’ is ambitious and requires commitment from all sectors of education, if we are to move forward to become a research enriched profession and improve the life chances of children in Scotland.

References

Hulme, R, Cracknell, D. & Owens, A. (2009) Learning in third spaces: developing trans-professional understanding through practitioner enquiry. Educational Action Research; Dec2009, Vol. 17 Issue 4, p537-550, 14p

 Improving Schools in Scotland: An OECD Perspective (2015)

http://www.oecd.org/unitedkingdom/improving-schools-in-scotland.htm, last accessed 16-1-16

 Moje, E.B., Ceichanowski, K., Kramer, K. Ellis, L. Carrillo, R. & Collazo, T. (2004) Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading research Quarterly, 39(1), 38-71

 Scharmer, O. (2001) Self-transcending knowledge: Sensing and organizing around emerging opportunities. Journal of Knowledge Management 5, no. 2: 137–51.

 Soja, E.  (1996) Third space: Journeys to Los Angles and other real and imagined places (Malden, MA, Blackwell)

 Zeichner, K.  (2010) ‘Rethinking the connections between campus courses and field experiences in college and university based teacher education’, Journal of teacher education, 61 (1-2), 88-99