Full Library

What do we want to know? This review aims to explore and describe the role of the specialist in CPD programmes that provide evidence of positive outcomes for pupils as well as teachers within a broad range of indicators, including (for pupils) achievement, attainment, motivation and attitudes; and (for teachers) behaviours, knowledge, understanding and a range of affective outcomes, such as beliefs, attitudes and motivation. Who wants to know and why? The issue of how best to support teachers in their CPD is of interest to teachers, professional associations and agencies responsible for the quality and provision of teacher training. What did we find? • We only found studies where the ‘results’ indicated a positive impact of CPD. Most of the ‘evaluations’ were designed and conducted by the specialists themselves using research approaches with limited capacity to control for the potential biases arising from such a situation. • Pupil impact data was reported in the areas of learning and achievement, and affective development, including attitudes to learning and self-esteem. • Changes in teacher practice resulted from teachers learning more about teaching strategies, learning theories, the use of technology, educational policy and subject knowledge. • Specialists supported teachers through modelling, workshops, observation, feedback, coaching, and planned and informal meetings for discussion. Nearly all specialist support took place on school premises. More than half the CPD involved the specialists in observing teachers and providing feedback and debriefing. They discussed pupil needs, examined test results, reviewed the results of interviews conducted with and by pupils, and observed pupil interaction in the classroom. The quantity of formal ‘input’ was extensive and sustained. • Peer support was a consistent feature. • Specialists encouraged teachers to take on a degree of leadership in their CPD. What are the implications? The limitations of the evidence reviewed mean that we are cautious about putting forward any definitive interpretation of the implications of this review for the practices of specialist CPD. It is clear that we need more rigorous independent evaluation of CPD initiatives. The review evidence highlighted an intensive pattern of support in terms of the variety of skills specialists brought with them, and the amount of time they spent on input and support. This suggests we need to develop a more sophisticated approach to identifying, developing and drawing on the knowledge and skills both of professionals within school, and across networks, so that capacity can be built based on existing resources. More specifically, the review suggests the need for professional development for lead practitioners and CPD leaders to develop specific, specialist knowledge, understanding and skills related to adult professional learning. How did we get these results? The Review Group screened over 3,000 titles and abstracts, from which 239 studies reporting the impact and processes of CPD which involved specialists were identified. Scrutiny of the full reports led to a final sample of 22 studies for in-depth review. All these studies contained teacher and pupil data. Nineteen studies with overall medium or high weight of evidence were used to create a synthesis of findings.