This paper presents a prototype model of continuing professional development (CPD) with a particular focus on the development of school leaders. We argue that successful outcomes of CPD are contingent on a number of pre-programme factors as well as the content and quality of the training itself. The model offers school leaders both a pre-programme diagnostic tool and an aid to the selection of appropriate post-programme strategies. The paper draws on findings from a three-phase evaluation of the Strategic Leadership in ICT (SLICT) programme, a CPD initiative for UK school leaders developed by the National College for School Leadership (NCSL). The evaluations were conducted between 2001-2007, the main foci of which were respectively the robustness of the CPD model itself (Phase I), followed by an assessment of the medium- (II) and longer-term (III) impact of the programme in participants’ schools. Initial analyses indicated a disparity between generally high levels of approval for the programme itself and the considerable variation in its impact in schools. Although this variability is not untypical of CPD outcomes generally (e.g. Day et al, 2000), it clearly had considerable significance for the development of - and claims made for - what was to become a national CPD programme. This paper concerns a core element of our attempt to explain this phenomenon, whereby we sought to determine the relationship between pre-CPD factors (those which pre-existed entry into the SLICT programme) and the level and nature of post-SLICT developments in policy and practice. Our early analyses led us to the concept of leadership ‘archetypes’. An archetype is represented by a cluster or profile of (pre-CPD) participant characteristics which included their: - perceptions of the level of ICT integration in the school, - pre-programme expectations of the SLICT programme, - receptiveness to the core objectives of the programme and - leadership style. Although these archetypes were relatively broadly drawn, the evidence pointed to a clear relationship between ‘input’ and output’, that is outcomes were significantly influenced by what participants ‘brought to’ the CPD experience. This further suggested the possibility of developing a predictive model in which it would be possible to map entry characteristics onto the CPD framework, which in turn would help to identify potential development needs and likely outcomes. In the final phase of the evaluation, where we had the opportunity to assess the longer term impact of the programme, we sought to explore this relationship in greater depth, and to develop a more finessed model of this process. Building on the work of existing models of professional development, in particular the work of Harland and Kinder (1997) we developed a prototype model which takes account of (i) pre-course factors (categorised as ‘person’, ‘personnel’ and ‘institutional’); (ii) the nature of the professional development itself (drawing on Harland and Kinder’s typology) and (iii) appropriate identification of affordances for and barriers to effective change.

Data were collected via online surveys to school leaders who participated in the study, observations of the SLICT programme, interviews with participants and other key school personnel during visits to selected schools, including a purpose designed 'audit trail' instrument to track the progress of strategic developments in ICT, and classroom observations of lessons in which ICT was being used to support the teaching and/or learning process. Across the three phases over 300 participants completed the surveys. Visits were made to 39 schools which included primary, secondary and special institutions.

In the paper we will present the model, which facilitates the mapping of a range of possible ‘outcome routes’ associated with different interactions between these various factors. Although our initial focus was on the development of a primarily diagnostic tool, we will also discuss an unanticipated benefit of the model which is its potential for guiding school leaders in making appropriate strategic choices following a CPD experience. Finally, we will show how the analyses leading to the development of the model contributed to refinements introduced by NCSL into the CPD/SLICT model itself.