Professional learning is more than a linear process leading to pre-determined outcomes (Boylan et al, 2018, Strom and Viesca, 2021). There can be no single way that education leaders can determine the best or most effective approaches. McMillan and Jess (2021) argue that teachers need to move towards adaptive classroom practice, “…moving beyond the simplistic transmission of knowledge by developing the ability to respond to, and influence, the dynamic and ever-changing environment in which they work” (p276). In the same way, education leaders need to be developing strategies of complex adaptive leadership to address this ‘complex turn’ rather than restricting their actions to outcome-focused approaches (Daly et al, 2020).
In complex education environments, professional learning must be the responsibility of individual professionals. Much professional learning is implicit and highly personal (Evans, 2019). What works in one case may not be effective or relevant in another. However, many aspects of professional learning need to be managed and led to ensure equity and opportunity. Leaders build communities of learning, enabling everyone to achieve, and this includes professional learning. Leaders oversee professional working relationships; they intervene when necessary and always support the professional learning of others. They create and sustain cultures of critical enquiry. With others, they ensure that professional learning is active, collaborative, inclusive and not insular. So, multi-dimensional strategies are needed if leaders are to guide and support their professional colleagues most effectively (Jones, 2020), and these need to be enacted through a variety of approaches, referred to in Wales as ‘the professional learning blend’ (Jones et al, 2019).
The research evidence base on leading professional learning is wide and growing (Hallinger and Kulophas, 2020). Much of it has only marginal relevance to individual school contexts and, being international in its scope, it carries with it cultural characteristics which make direct transferability tricky. Just because it worked there, it may not work here. There is also a tendency to focus on ‘what works’, identifying examples of ‘most-effective practice’ and implying that leaders should aspire to emulate these ways of doing things successfully. Much of this research is very helpful (see, for example the paper by Cordingley et al (2020) on “Developing great leadership of CPDL”. Their report identifies the kinds of support school leaders must provide to maximise the benefit of high-quality professional learning and they highlight key priorities for effective school leaders to help them link this effectively with school improvement. Occasionally we see research which throws light on less-effective practice, and this may be just as helpful to education leaders when working with their teams to confront the realities of highly complex situations. The article by McChesney and Aldridge (2019) looks at “What gets in the way” and identifies obstacles facing education leaders in implementing strategies for professional learning.
If accepted for ECER 2022, this paper will focus on the implications for school leaders in Wales of the new National Approach to Professional Learning. It will resonate with professionals in other European countries and internationally beyond Europe. It is intended to raise questions and stimulate discussion on the appropriate use of linear models and effectiveness criteria in setting out strategies for leading professional learning.
