Research School Network: Evidence Informed Leadership How has a new evidence review on school environment and leadership validated our approach to profesisonal development?

In recent years we have witnessed a bit of a quiet revolution in education. Thanks to the work of a growing number of organisations, individuals and groups we have moved from being ​‘research unaware’ to ​‘research aware’ and then to ​‘research informed’. In my former role as Director of Durrington Research School I would like to think I played a small part in this. We focused on helping teachers to use the research evidence to shape their teaching e.g. thinking about how the evidence around aspects such as metacognition, feedback and cognitive science could shape their pedagogy and curriculum planning. We have also worked with leaders, by encouraging them to think about how to get better at aspects of leadership such as implementation and professional development. However, whilst we have moved on nicely with evidence-informed teaching, the evidence around effective leadership is, at best, sparse.

With this in mind, it was great to see the good people at Evidence Based Education, publishing a new evidence review ​‘School Environment & Leadership’. In his introduction to this report Lee Davis says:

​‘In recent years, we are seeing more and more evidence that school leadership has a significant influence on student outcomes — second only, perhaps, to classroom teaching — and that leadership is a critical determinant of overall organisational performance and success. What leaders do, therefore, seems to matter.

However, the purpose of this report is to explore the evidence in support of such actions and the relative strength of that evidence. In so doing, it asks us to challenge our pre-existing assumptions about leadership and the school environment and look afresh at what underpins them.’

The report then goes on to explore a number of school-level factors that require leadership coordination to best support learning. These are the factors that the evidence seems to suggest, leaders would be best placed putting their time and efforts into. I thought I would explore the group of factors that fall into the ​‘Teacher and Curriculum-Focused Learning Supports’. These are factors that affect the teaching-learning interaction, but are (largely) outside the control of an individual classroom teacher. This is an area where we have focused on quite heavily here at Durrington.

What are the factors?

4. Collaboration

Staff peer support; teacher-teacher trust; explicit collaboration on curriculum, pedagogy and assessment.

5. Collective teacher expertise

Teacher knowledge, skills and expertise; breadth and quality of experience, within both the school and immediate team.

6. Professional learning

Opportunities and drive for professional learning: time; funding; expectation; valuing; quality assurance

7. Goals and demands

Culture of high expectations for all students; demanding curriculum.

8. Resources and materials

High-quality learning materials (sequenced, scaffolded, aligned with learning aims); space / accommodation fit for purpose.

How have these factors shaped professional development at Durrington?

A number of years ago we wanted to look at our core PD provision. We wanted our PD to be far more subject specific, collaborative, focused on supporting teachers to improve their pedagogy and sustained over time. As a result, we implemented ​‘Subject Planning & Development Sessions’ (SPDS).

SPDS take place once a fortnight and involve curriculum teams meeting. During these meetings, the discussion is framed around the question ​‘What are we teaching over the next fortnight and how do we teach it well?’ The team will look at a curriculum area that will be taught and discuss how to teach it effectively. This might include:

- What is the prior knowledge needed to understand this part of the curriculum really well?
- How can I explain this idea really effectively?
- How can we use what was in that blog about retrieval practice in our subject?
- What is the tier 2 and 3 vocabulary that I will need to explicitly teach?
- What are the common misconceptions?
- What questions can I ask to really make them think deeply?
- What other areas of the curriculum can I link this to?
- What elaborative questions would I ask?
- How will I model this effectively?
- Where are the opportunities to support self-regulation?

This is by no means exhaustive, but a flavour of the conversations that will be taking place during the SPDS. As a result of this, every fortnight we have really rich discussions taking place within our curriculum teams, around curriculum intent and implementation. It’s probably been the most successful PD we have implemented and unsurprisingly fits very closely with the five factors listed above.

Our School Improvement Plan (SIP) sets out the goals and demands we think will be important in terms of pushing the school forward. This year this includes having the highest expectations in terms of curriculum rigour and supporting students to become more effective, self-regulating learners. Curriculum leaders then contextualise these priorities in their Department Improvement Plans (DIP). SPDS give curriculum teams the opportunity to collaborate on this. Working together, each curriculum team will discuss the area of the curriculum to be taught over the next fortnight and share insights around how to teach it effectively. The strongest collaborations are sustained over time, as this allows colleagues to know, understand and exploit the strengths of their peers. As SPDS take place every two weeks, they support this idea of sustained collaboration. Sharing collective teacher expertise in this way every fortnight, supports the development of consistently strong teaching across each curriculum team, by using the knowledge and experience that exists within the team. The SPDS will stimulate lots of coaching type conversations between teachers, as they share approaches to teaching. The maths team, for example, have used this as a great way to discuss how to use mini-whiteboards most effectively. Elsewhere the science department have shared the type of elaborative questioning they use. The commitment to using time in this way for ongoing professional learning, not only supports teacher development, but it also supports teacher workload, as teachers are planning collaboratively and sharing or co-constructing teaching resources and materials.

Professional learning is further supported in the fortnight between SPDS, by the Curriculum Leader visiting lessons and seeing how effectively the approaches discussed at the SPDS are being implemented. This will support who they prioritise for further support through instructional coaching.

At the next SPDS, Curriculum Leaders can give the whole team feedback on how they are doing with the goals that had been outlined at the previous SPDS (and in their DIP) and use this to refine the focus moving forwards.

SPDS have enabled our Curriculum Leaders to ensure that teachers are constantly talking about teaching and as a result, the curriculum is delivered with rigour, coherence and well sequenced. Teachers think deeply about how best to apply ideas from cognitive science and educational research to their subjects. This was recognised by inspectors in our most recent OFSTED inspection (March 2022):

​“Subject leaders are highly knowledgeable and passionate. They provide training to ensure that teachers have expert knowledge of each topic”

This recent review is great for school leaders as it signposts them to where it is best for them to focus their time and effort. Whilst this is a great starting point, just identifying and prioritising the most appropriate factors will not be enough. Leaders will then need to think carefully about how they implement them, if they are going to have the most impact. The EEF have some great resources on effective implementation.

Shaun Allison

Co-Headteacher

Durrington High School