Teacher change myths and models Brenda Keogh

Teacher change: myths and models Brenda Keogh & Stuart Naylor NAIGS Annual Conference July 2009

Some myths about change Changing the curriculum results in changes to professional practice. Change is difficult, and it always takes a long time. Many teachers are resistant to change. A constructivist approach is valuable for pupils but not necessary for teachers.

Looking back at curriculum change The National Curriculum was introduced more than 20 years ago. Have all the curriculum changes since then been sufficient to achieve what we want to see happening in lessons? Are our teachers of science teaching ‘engaging, challenging and inspiring lessons’? (Foreword to the KS 3 National Strategy, DFES 2002)

Looking forward to curriculum change Will the current curriculum changes come in a teacher-proof package? Will they work for all teachers of science, not just the enthusiasts?

Cognitive Acceleration in Science Education Aspects of the CASE Project: § a clearly articulated philosophy § supported by extensive research § coherent and well thought-out § good quality resource material § empirical research shows that it raises levels of achievement significantly ‘It sounds great. Why isn’t everybody doing it? ’ (a recent Australian visitor)

Cognitive Acceleration in Science Education What are the implications of taking up CASE? § extensive training § high cost § finding extra time for CASE lessons § radical change in approach for many teachers So it’s a big investment. It’s a big risk if it doesn’t work.

What about APP? Here’s what it looks like so far: § extensive documentation, including material on the website § a centralised training model, in which consultants use material worked out by experts § a radical change in approach for many teachers § an explicit link to the inspection process

What about APP? Here’s what teachers have to do: § understand how HSW subdivides into 5 AFs § understand how each AF is separated into levels, with 3 or 4 bullet points for each level § relate the skills-based levels and bullets to a largely content-based So. W in many schools § use the AFs to make assessment judgements about individuals & groups as part of everyday teaching § use this assessment data to adjust their teaching for individuals, groups & classes

What about APP? Here’s a more precise description of that last point: Once you have identified gaps in pupils’ learning you should use the Framework objectives and Programme of Study to plan for relevant teaching and learning opportunities. (taken from the DCSF Standards website)

What about the Rose Review? Here’s what it looks like so far: § a radical reversal of the separation of the curriculum into discrete subjects § a much greater focus on skill development § a radical change in approach for many teachers § the possibility of training for the new curriculum being entirely on line

Changing professional practice Why might teachers change their practice? Here are some possible reasons. § Evidence from research § Attractive resources that they want to use § Hero innovators who act as role models § ‘Do it or else. . . ‘ § Evidence from practice What will help teachers to commit to new ways of working? What about the psychology of introducing change in professional practice?

Changing professional practice ‘Radical, difficult, painful and time-consuming’. . .

Teachers’ responses to CAME What fool thought of that? Dump it! That’s exactly what happened in my school! (A teacher from Stamford School, Lincs, at the Maths in Education and Industry Conference, June 2009)

Changing professional practice An alternative view: a Trojan Horse model We need to remember that all teachers will be teaching any new curriculum arrangements - the uninspired as well as the inspiring - the dinosaurs as well as the innovators How will we work with all our teachers to convince them of the merits of any new initiative?

Changing professional practice A Trojan Horse model for CPD: q Find easy ways in that you think will work. q Offer low-risk, low-investment opportunities for teachers to change their practice. q Ensure that any suggestions are based on sound pedagogy, so that teachers are likely to get positive feedback from changes in their practice. q Don’t be over-ambitious; stick to realistic challenges. Does this seem like better psychology?

Changing professional practice Hargreaves and Fullan argue that deeper levels of understanding and changes in beliefs about teaching may arise first by using materials which require new behaviour and practices, leading to new beliefs and understanding. Cited in Goulding M (2002) Cognitive acceleration in mathematics: teachers’ views Evaluation and Research in Education, 16, 2, 104 -119

Here’s what one teacher said When I used the ideas that you suggested I found that more pupils were thinking more of the time. The numbers varied from class to class, but typically I would say there was a shift from about 20% to about 70% of them thinking. (A secondary Head of Department, after a course at SLC WM)

Changing professional practice Major curriculum changes are determined for us. The role of NAIGS members includes: q understanding the purpose of changes to the curriculum q recognising what it is possible to achieve (not just with the most enthusiastic and effective) q helping teachers to make any changes manageable

Changing professional practice This seems a lot like teaching: q Your success depends on how other people respond to what you do. q You often have to simplify complex ideas to make them more accessible q Good relationships and effective communication are essential

Changing professional practice I never underestimate teachers’ skill in continuing to do what they consider works for them and resisting that with which they do not wish to engage. J Hattie (2009) Visible Learning, p 215. Routledge.

Changing professional practice: some questions 1. Can we imagine a Trojan Horse that we could use with the current curriculum changes? What might it look like? How would you follow it up? 2. What strategies do we use to convince reluctant teachers of the value of change? How do we help them to see change as manageable?

Contact details Brenda Keogh & Stuart Naylor Millgate House Education Unit 1, ZAN Business Park Crewe Road, Sandbach, CW 11 4 QD, UK Tel 01270 764314 Fax 05601 156500 info@millgatehouse. co. uk www. millgatehouse. co. uk