Research School Network: Collaboration Research School associate Deb Friis writes about how teams and departments in schools can collaborate effectively.

As part of my work with Sussex Maths Hub I recently ran a session on collaboration within the maths department for my colleagues in a number of schools across the area. We started by discussing what we mean by the word ​“collaboration” and the participants came up with the following ideas:

• Helping
• Consistency
• Team-work
• Efficiency
• Learning new methods
• Building relationships
• Share the workload
• Troubleshooting
  
• Motivational, enjoyable
• Allows discussion of the methods shown to students
• Creates a shared responsibility
• Working together to achieve a common goal

A quick internet search gives the definition as ​“a working practise where individuals work together for a common purpose to achieve a benefit”. I then asked them why as teachers we might collaborate and these are their responses:

• Create better resources: ​“more minds”
• Consistency
• Best resources being used by all
• Time saving in terms of overall hours spent planning within the team
• New ideas, consistency, troubleshoot any potential issues

In a recent blog from the National Centre for Excellence in Teaching Mathematics (NCETM) which talks about working with colleagues, some myths about collaborative planning are dispelled. It doesn’t mean that the scheme of work is divided up and topics are shared out between teachers to plan individually. It doesn’t mean that teachers can access a shared drive of resources that are used by everyone. Effective collaboration really involves teachers thinking deeply about their subjects and more particularly about the pedagogy of their subject: how students will approach, learn and retain the information that they are being taught. Working together means that novice teachers can learn from experts and the more experienced may come across some new ideas via newer colleagues. True collaboration should mean that teachers in a department can agree a level of consistency with what they teach, therefore making sure that all students get the same deal in their lessons. In a subject such as maths which requires understanding of many methods this can be of real benefit as students are likely to have a number of different teachers over their years in school.

On VisibleLearning.org, John Hattie (2018) has an updated ranking of his ​“effect sizes”, which try to quantify how different factors link to better student outcomes, with an effect size of 0.4 being the ​“hinge point”. There are many factors both within and outside a teacher’s control but just a few that mention teachers specifically: ​“Collective teacher efficacy” (the collective belief of teachers in their ability to affect student outcomes) is top at 1.57, but ​“teacher credibility” comes in a 0.9 and ​“teacher clarity” at 0.75. In her article in Impact magazine (Sept 2022), Caroline Entwhistle argues that time spent trying to address and improve these particular factors is therefore time well spent. Effective lesson delivery is key: teacher clarity and credibility are improved through precise explanations, well thought out worked examples and use of key questions. Both time and resources are vital to the success of a drive to improve collaboration within departments, and leadership support is necessary. At Caroline’s school they have dedicated time after school each week where departments meet together to follow a specific structure focussing on a key stage four lesson to be delivered in the following week.

At Durrington we also have dedicated ​“Subject Planning and Development Sessions” or ​“SP[u]DS” as they are known, and these fortnightly meetings have the same overarching aim: to develop subject and pedagogical knowledge and ideas. However this is sometimes easier said than done, and the National Centre for Excellence in Teaching Mathematics (NCETM) also gives some ideas about specifically how to promote collaboration. They suggest that subject leaders begin by picking a topic or question and ask teachers to first approach it as if they were a student, considering the thinking that they are doing and also the pitfalls that might occur. This is a great way-in for a department not used to collaborative sessions, particularly if the question is well-chosen: perhaps from a topic which is notoriously difficult to teach, or one which could be taught in many different ways. Discussions of different methods used, and the pros and cons of each, can be really fruitful.

Once this spirit of collaboration is established there are many ways in which it could be extended. It can be valuable for departments to consider sequencing of a scheme of work together, particularly as there will be expertise from across year groups and attainment ranges, and discussion can be really useful to refine the order of teaching to improve the scheme of work for the future.

Joint lesson planning can be a great activity but must be carefully done. It is far better (and takes less time) to plan one fantastic lesson than five mediocre ones, but time needs to be spent working together to decide the principles underpinning the lessons. A model which works well is that once a topic has been sequenced, different members of staff pre-prepare draft outline lessons, and collaboration time is spent working through these together: discussing examples, adapting explanations and thinking about how to challenge and support students at each stage.

The NCETM do not advocate that all teachers necessarily teach the same lessons or use the same activities, but do suggest that it is useful to agree upon common representations or methods which will be used across the department. They also give a reminder that collaboration is not just useful before a lesson is taught, but also afterwards. Discussing, refining and adapting explanations and worked examples are just as important and it is always interesting to reflect upon how a class approached a particular activity so that this knowledge can be fed into new planning.

True collaboration within a department can be a win on many levels. It makes for great staff development with everyone learning from each other. It can also be a real time-saver, with higher-quality lessons planned for use by all rather than teachers individually planning for their own classes. And fundamentally this will benefit students: more consistency across staff, more teacher clarity and teacher credibility, all hopefully leading to improved outcomes.

Deb is a maths teacher at Durrington High School. She is also a Maths Research Associate for Durrington Research School and Sussex Maths Hub Secondary Co-Lead. She is delivering the Evidence Champions online training and also the Effective Professional Development 3‑day course along with Chris Runeckles this year.