Collaboration, creativity and capital in professional learning contexts

Education is a complex process so we often attempt to manage learning by first reducing it to manageable situations (control), ensuring that there is clear direction (authority), keeping a defined short-term, achievable end in sight (outcomes) and measuring the extent to which these outcomes have been met (performative accountability). These factors are evident both in classroom learning situations and in school cultures where leaders require conformity, and where creativity is carefully managed. In some contexts, although models of partnership are seemingly promoted, these lie within tight constraints with the intention of producing defined outcomes. Even mentoring arrangements may develop into cultures of dependency if the ‘more-experienced-other’ person models teaching in a follow-me style. Professional capital (Hargreaves and Fullan 2012) is built on the premise that the benefits of individual capital are more likely to be reaped where collective cultures operating in synergy are in place. This is a powerful and important concept, but the integrity of professional capital is often lost when the demands for individual accountability impede creativity. The articles in this issue focus on models of connectivity and collaboration which build effective teaching and learning cultures, but they also take a critical look at the claims arising from some of these.

The ways in which professional learning is supported and encouraged in complex contexts is the basis of Sorensen’s article, which considers the concept of the ‘expert’ teacher and the importance of improvisation in the teacher’s repertoire. He argues that ‘one of the crucial elements of teaching is the unplanned, spontaneous nature of the relationship between teacher and pupil’ (p. 8) and he defines improvisation as ‘a mode of intentional creative action that has unpredictable and uncertain outcomes, derived from “real time” interactions (with other people or materials)’ (p. 16). Sorensen contends that in a performative culture ‘ends justify the means [and] teachers become averse to risk’ (p. 6), becoming wedded to the notion that ‘knowledge is a fixed and permanent commodity’ while what is really needed is a ‘spirit of movement, mobility and momentum’ epitomised by improvisation (p. 8). Of relevance to Professional Development in Education, he asks how professional development for improvisation might be framed and identifies a number of principles which might serve to do this. The first of these acknowledges the diversity of teacher expertise, in that all teachers bring personalised approaches to teaching that are ‘based on their values and beliefs, the relationships they established with the pupils and the personalisation of the learning environment’ (p. 17). This is fundamental to the design of professional learning programmes in complex contexts so that rather than adopting ‘training’ approaches which attempt uniform acquisition of knowledge and skills, the need for individual interpretation, innovation and improvisation should be part of the design.

The article by Margolis, Durbin and Doring also highlights the complexity of attempting to take a singular approach to teacher professional development (TPD). Working in the context of the USA, but with a universal message, they comment that ‘expected TPD outcomes may vary across school districts; what is right for one school may be unhelpful or even impossible for another based on local conditions and organizational culture’ so it is crucial that ‘the importance of engaging teachers in real-life learning situations is highlighted’ (p. 24). The importance of student presence in professional development scenarios would seem to be an obvious pre-requisite, but in an interesting and significant article the authors argue that ‘changes in TPD structures and culture must occur simultaneously – and physical student presence is a potential organizing link between the two’ (p. 24). The job-embedded model of teacher professional development is likely to be more effective than the PLC model because ‘TPD has much more meaningful impact when it occurs in authentic environments, such as a classroom’ (p. 26). Echoing Sorensen’s point, they argue that ‘when TPD occurs in authentic school situations and is “experiential in nature”, teachers are able to be more innovative with instruction and apply relevant learning theories’ (p. 26). The use of lesson study and models from medicine are discussed, with the emphasis being that ‘authentic TPD is situated within a classroom environment, which very often includes the presence of real students’ (p. 28). In an attempt to bring together the key elements of effective teacher professional development the authors provide a model illustrating the theories of teacher learning (from behaviourist to socio-cultural) and the approaches in designing TPD. The model presents seven levels of TPD with progressively more physical student presence and, significantly the model ‘suggests that we need, in much more systematic ways, to invite students to the actual event where learning takes place’ (p. 31). The authors do not deny the logistical and other costs which may impede the application of high student inclusivity in professional development, but if the highest levels of outcome are sought, this model of professional development should provide an excellent framework for their design.

The interconnectivity of processes and professionals in workplace settings is further illustrated in the study by Lofthouse and Thomas. In connecting Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) through the partnerships that have been established between mentors, serving teachers and student-teachers, they explore how these connections may strengthen and support individual approaches to teaching. Focusing their research on the experiences of teachers working in pairs to develop their own practice, they emphasise that ‘Collaboration for professional learning has both individual and social dimensions, and can create conditions supporting engagement, action, reflection and sense-making’ (p. 38). Using a multiple case-study approach to draw out real-life phenomena in a number of contexts, they highlight 10 cases where teachers and student-teachers work together for practice development, characterised by one-to-one meetings, planned activity and shared reflection. They distinguish between collaboration and cooperation: ‘Collaboration and cooperation both imply doing something with at least one other person. The key difference is in the intent and social practice’ (p. 51). The existence of ‘togetherness’ in a working relationship provides one of a number of interesting dimensions to the study. In concluding that collaboration enables teachers to ‘engage in more informed decision-making and to construct a shared understanding of the nature of the desired learning outcomes and how they might be achieved in their own contexts’ (p. 55), the article provides a useful insight into the ways in which collaboration impacts on the professional practices of teachers and adds substance to the often assumed conclusions that collaboration is ‘a good thing’.

While physical interconnectivity in the professional learning experience provides an additional dimension to learning, there may be logistical issues in areas where distance between schools and between teachers is considerable. The article by Owen emphasises the need for contact and challenge between professionals but sets this within a context of online opportunities for Professional Learning and Development (PLD) in New Zealand. The Virtual Professional Learning and Development programme was rolled out in 2014 with the aim of developing a model of PLD for education practitioners ‘based on authentic and meaningful learning and teaching contexts using virtual tools and services’ (p. 61). Two key foci of the programme were the development of effective online communities of practice and the use of virtual mentoring. In a departure from typical professional learning programmes, the Virtual Professional Learning and Development programme ‘has no formal “content”, associated accredited institution or formal assessment; rather, the programme offers multiple ways to participate, while participants pursue their own inquiry based on the needs of their students, school and school community’ (p. 61). The challenges of professional isolation are conveyed graphically through the voices of two secondary school educators and the impact of the programme (albeit small) is described. As is often the case, such programmes highlight further challenges and the author argues that ‘… without profound alterations to the bureaucratic, androcentric, control-centred ways in which many schools (and PLD programmes) are run, innovative professional development initiatives are likely to prove temporary and localised in their impact’ (p. 68). She concludes with the reality that numbers on this programme remain small and that ‘there are questions arising around cost-effectiveness, scalability and in turn equity of access and sustainability for larger numbers of participants’ (p. 69). Nevertheless, the model outlined here is worthy of further consideration in regions with diverse cultures and disparate geographies which want to nurture the development of individual professionals.

One frequently extolled model of connectivity and collaboration is that of professional learning communities (PLCs). There are many examples in the literature of instances where PLCs have been set up and, in their early phases, let to positive impact on teachers’ thinking and learning. However, some of these examples are anecdotal and reflect the start-up energies that typify the early stages of a PLC. Few studies look at sustainability and impact over prolonged periods of time. The article by Hairon, Goh, Chua and Wang is therefore an important addition to the literature. They argue that ‘Although international research on PLCs is relatively extensive, covering about three decades, there are still gaps in its research base’ (p. 72), partly because of the contestability of the three components of the PLC construct (‘professional’, ‘learning’ and ‘communities’) which make the phenomenon so complex to identify in practice. Also, significantly, ‘the empirical research base has yet to match the claims made on PLC effects, especially that of student outcomes’ (p. 73). In addition, much investment has been placed in a large number of educational systems to promote PLCs as collaborative solutions to improvement. There is, therefore, an urgent need ‘to develop a research agenda and framework that is able to support the claims of PLCs on school improvement and effectiveness’ (p. 73). This article provides some response to this, and the authors propose an agenda for PLC research ‘that will afford substantive theorization on PLCs [and] which will need to be drawn from robust empirical evidence’ (p. 72). The authors propose that ‘future research work should invest in three inter-dependent aspects: construct of PLCs; conditions–contexts of PLCs; and causalities of PLCs’ (p. 84) and provide for discussion a number of research design characteristics which would give rigour to research into PLCs. In drawing attention to the fact that some of the claims for the effectiveness of PLCs are poorly substantiated, the authors provide a service which will benefit practitioners and policy-makers seeking to justify the setting up of such collaborative initiatives.

In the next article, Taylor takes the concept of ‘professional growth’ as his underlying theme and, at an early stage, discusses the terminology used to encompass professional learning. In a useful overview of approaches and interpretations, he suggests that ‘Together, teacher learning and development comprise professional growth – a term perhaps synonymous with CPD, but better reflecting agentive considerations’ (p. 90). As indicated in the earlier articles, he sees professional growth as having a high degree of individual focus and emphasises that teacher accounts of professional growth ‘are crucial to interpreting and understanding their individual and collective experiences’ (p. 90). He uses his interviews with teachers from a number of European countries to give expression to different experiences of professional growth and discusses the importance of complexity thinking in enabling us to understand the processes of professional learning. He makes an important point in stating that:

although teachers were interviewed as individuals, sometimes in groups, their accounts of professional learning usually invoked others – learners, colleagues, peers and leaders – as well as their organisational contexts and external conditions … This approach began to open up coherent conversations, which in further studies may allow a deeper understanding of the complex purposes, opportunities and responses involved in teacher development and learning. (p. 102)

We look forward to further exploration of the application of complexity theory and complexity thinking to professional learning and development.

In Scotland, the concept of professional growth through career-long professional learning has gained momentum in policy and practice in recent years. The complexity of any career-long process is itself interesting, but it is made more so when considered in relation to the nature of leadership connectivity required to support and give space for individuals to learn and develop as professionals. Within this is a fundamental principle that education needs to promote social justice aims and that effective leadership is required if these social justice aims are to be realised. The article by Forde and Torrance brings together these different elements and provides an illustration of approaches being taken in Scotland towards embedding leadership for social justice within professional learning for school leaders. The importance of context is again emphasised and the professional learning embedded within leadership development needs to be seen within this. Beginning with an international perspective on social justice leadership, the authors focus on the Scottish context and the ways in which social justice is embedded within the Scottish professional standards. They draw out from this the importance of seeing leadership as a continuum of practice and analyse the ways in which social justice principles are made visible so that ‘social justice leadership is not seen as a function solely of headship but is a facet of all leadership roles’ (p. 115). If Scottish education is to avoid the ‘unidimensional and politically expedient solutions … that are short term and largely concerned with targeting individual pupils to improve their examination scores’ (p. 117) then, they argue, leadership development has to be seen as a transformational experience.

The theme of leadership in different contexts is continued in the article by Lindle, Della Sala, Reese, Klar, Knoeppel and Buskey. They draw attention to the fact that coaching models frequently focus on teachers rather than leaders and that much research on leadership development focuses on urban rather than rural contexts. The article proposes a logic model (defined as ‘a theory of action for achieving a specific goal’; p. 125) used to examine the effects of coaching/mentoring to enhance leadership development in rural settings in the USA. Interestingly, the authors describe the context in which school leaders were operating and, although the context is set in the USA, some of the characteristics will be recognisable by others in education elsewhere. The ‘emotions of leadership’ described include: declining school budgets set within economic recession within the state; state and federal policy debates which included public criticism of teachers; and educators across the state ‘feeling under-valued and under attack’ (p. 134). The authors conclude: ‘An understanding of how to coach school leaders through the dynamics of their policy and learning environments may implicate an acknowledgement of emotions … in the continuous dynamics associated with learning’ (pp. 134–5).

The final article by Mackay critically examines the concept of career capital when applied to professional development in education contexts. Seeing career capital as ‘accumulated development and knowledge competence for job progress’ (p. 140), this article is both interesting and significant in examining the instrumental view of professional development as a form of capital for career development. Drawing on literature from the field of business as well as education, and focusing the research on human resource practitioners, Mackay identifies a number of critical issues including the perceived value of higher level qualifications, the acquisition of transferrable skills through CPD which potentially increases individual self-worth and, in the context of capital enhancement through connectivity, the importance of collective endeavour in the learning process. She concludes with the important observation that professional development:

… particularly in education, is more than a market imperative to adapt to managerial needs. The implication for educators is to elevate the long-term value of professional development that enhances well-being, supports empowerment and supports individuals’ ability to contribute to society. (p. 153)

Ken Jones
Managing Editor