A Whole School Approach to Addressing Literacy Difficulties: Evaluation of a Large Scale Continuing Professional Development Initiative
Author(s):
Claire McVeigh (presenting / submitting) Sharon McMurray
Conference:
ECER 2017
Network:
01. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Format:
Paper

Session Information

01 SES 05 C, Evaluation and Impact of Professional Development Programmes

Paper Session

Time:
2017-08-23
13:30-15:00
Room:
K3.13
Chair:
Stefan Zehetmeier

Contribution

Continuing Professional Development (or CPD) has been defined as a learning process, resulting from the meaningful interaction between a teacher and their professional context, both in time and space, which leads to changes in their professional practice as well as changes in their thinking about that practice (Kelchtermans, 2004). A consensus in the literature suggests that the optimal conditions for continuing professional development involve an interactive, collaborative network of like-minded professionals who engage in a community of practice in which reflective professionals can develop and learn (Chetcuti et al. 2011; Claxton 2002; Craft and Paige-Smith 2008; McMillan et al. 2012; O’Connell and Dyment 2011; Timoštšuk and Ugaste 2010; Warford 2011; Whalley 2008). This has been demonstrated to have a positive impact on both staff and pupils (Vescio, Ross and Adams, 2007; Berry, Johnston and Montgomery 2005; Butler and Schnellert, 2012).

 

The objective of the present paper is to present key issues and findings from a project-led evaluation of a large scale, novel model of CPD in addressing the needs of children with literacy difficulties. The model utilised a whole school approach and, importantly, was facilitated by specialist teachers within their school.  This model was devised in order to enhance teachers’ expertise and foster a whole school approach in addressing the needs of children with literacy difficulties and was robustly tested over three years. Stranmillis University College, in partnership with St Mary’s University College, Belfast secured £4.06 million over 3 years to deliver this model, in order to enable primary school teachers in Northern Ireland to participate in an online course held in their own school and, for two teachers from each school to attend specialist face-to –face seminars taught at Master’s level. One teacher from each school had the opportunity to complete two Master’s modules and to be assessed for the award of Approved Teacher Status from the British Dyslexia Association. In this paper, an outline of the model is presented and key issues from an internal evaluation of the project are reported. This research investigated; 1. how schools were using the programme to develop their provision to meet the literacy needs of pupils; 2. the development of the professional expertise of the special educational needs co-ordinator (SENCo) 3. The development of staff on a whole school level, and 4. key issues for participating schools.

 

Method

At the beginning of the SEN CPD Literacy Project, a baseline evaluation was conducted through face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 32 schools participating in year one of the project. Data was collected through postal questionnaires with the remainder of schools (N=137). The findings from the postal questionnaires served to confirm the findings from semi-structured interviews. Twenty-seven of the 32 schools were then visited in the last four months of the project, approximately one year after the specialist teacher’s completion of the second Master’s module and four terms after the completion by the whole school of the on-line course. The purpose of this final semi-structured interview with the principal and/or specialist teacher was to try to ascertain the impact the project had on the quality of teaching and learning in the school, at least from the principal teacher’s and specialist teachers’ perspectives. The remaining five schools had staff changes or other extenuating circumstances that precluded a visit. Key findings from the semi-structures interviews are outlined which corroborated and extended responses from the questionnaires.

Expected Outcomes

Schools indicated that as a result of their participation they were better equipped to handle the range of special educational needs in literacy in their schools without having to rely so heavily on external support. Schools reported increased coherence and continuity in the children’s learning programme, as a result of the class teacher and the support teacher working more closely together. This change has been most noticeable in the schools which completed a professional practice module, and worked with a child with dyslexic-type difficulties, which is also where the greatest benefits for children have been documented. Teachers recognised an increase in their competence in assessing the strengths and shortcomings of individual children through astute and informed observation of the children’s learning. The Project’s model of CPD and the use of information technology was welcomed and enabled quality provision to be offered to large numbers of teachers at times that were most suitable to individual schools. An important outcome was the cascading of learning demonstrated, as teachers supported each other in taking their learning forward into practice. Due to the model’s in-built cascade of learning within the profession and the approach of working together, the model has been seen to bring about transformation at a whole school level through evidence-based changes to practice. Accreditation through higher education institutions, in addition to external validation by a specialist accreditation board played a key role in developing teacher’s confidence and competence to meet the needs of children in their classrooms. Conclusion: Teachers are the most valuable resource that any school can have and ensuring their continued professional development, must be central to any policy that seeks to improve the outcomes for children. Results have implications for the development of similar models of CPD internationally, however adaption of the model is cautioned without robust evaluation.

References

Berry, B., Johnson, D., & Montgomery, D. (2005). The power of teacher leadership. Educational Leadership, 62(5), 56-60. Butler, D. L., & Schnellert, L. (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher professional development. Teaching and teacher education, 28(8), 1206-1220. Chetcuti, D., Buhagiar, M., and Cardona, A., 2011. The professional development portfolio: learning through reflection in the first year of teaching. Reflective practice, 12 (1), 61–72. Claxton, G., 2002. Building learning power. Bristol: TLO. Craft, A. and Paige-Smith, A., 2008. Reflective practice. In: L. Miller and C. Cable, eds. Professionalism in the early years. Abingdon: Hodder Education, 87–97. Education and Training Inspectorate (2015). Understanding Difficulties in Literacy Development: Continuing Professional Development Programme 2012-2015 Report of a survey inspection. Education and Training Inspectorate: Northern Ireland. Kelchtermans, G. (2004). CPD for professional renewal: Moving beyond knowledge for practice. International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers, 217-237. McMillan, D. J., Walsh, G., Gray, C., Hanna, K., Carville, S., & McCracken, O. (2012). Changing mindsets: the benefits of implementing a professional development model in early childhood settings in Ireland. Professional development in education, 38(3), 395-410. O’Connell, T. and Dyment, J., 2011. The case of reflective journals: is the jury still out?. Reflective practice, 12 (1), 47–59. Timoštšuk, I. and Ugaste, A., 2010. Student teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and teacher education, 26 (8), 1563–1570. Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and teacher education, 24 1, 80-91. Warford, M., 2011. The zone of proximal teacher development. Teaching and teacher education, 27 (2), 252–258. Whalley, M., 2008. Leading practice in early years settings. Exeter: Learning Matters.

Author Information

Claire McVeigh (presenting / submitting)
Stranmillis University College
SEN Literacy and Assessment Unit
Belfast
Sharon McMurray
Stranmillis University College
SEN Literacy and Assessment Unit
Belfast

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.