A pragmatic meta-model to navigate complexity in teachers’ professional Learning

Figures & data

Figure 1. Context construct in the professional learning meta-model.

Table 1. Planning and evaluating PL: Context.

Context	Possible questions to be explored	Processes for planning/evaluating	Example
Macro (Economic, socio-cultural, political, historical contexts including central government	Is the focus of the PD experience aligned with national and international policies? What political, cultural, historical factors, and material conditions and power flows may influence teacher engagement with PL? For example: Has teacher PD historically been seen as something that is ‘done’ to teachers? Is the focus on the enactment of equity practices or preserving the status quo? Is accountability the key driver or enhancing teacher quality? Is teacher learning-practice conceived as a linear or complex process? Is teacher learning-practice conceived as an individual or networked process? Are teachers empowered to enact agency? Who is funding and/or evaluating this PL? How is it being evaluated?	National and international policies	Opfer and Pedder 2011a and b)Strom and Viesca (2020)Boylan et al. (2018)Hallinger, 2018Rawdon et al. (2020)
Meso (School, institutional and community levels)	As a school where are we now (in relation to our goals)? What do we want to achieve? Is engagement with the PD voluntary or mandatory? Is there alignment between district/school leadership values and teacher values? What supports do teachers//leaders/facilitators need to create organisational capacity for change e.g. understanding of complex systems, time, funding, resources, advocate/teacher leadership? What products/processes will support teacher learning-practice e.g. policies … ? Are teachers being empowered to create collaborative cultures to allow for reflection and enactment cycles? Will there be continued support through the reflection and enactment cycles to support enhanced learning/pedagogical content knowledge (PCK)?	District/Regional and School policies District/School meetings School Records Focus Groups Interviews Questionnaires/Surveys on school culture Teacher leader competencies survey	King 2014 ,King (2016) Opfer and Pedder 2011a ()Poekert et al. (2020)Audisio et al. (2022)Merchie et al. (2016)
ro (Teacher Antecedents, including baseline knowledge and skills)	Does the PD align with individual teacher interests, needs and/or identity? What is the personal motivation for engaging in this PD? Why are you engaging with this PD experience or activity? What are your expectations? What is your current level of knowledge and skills related to … ? What are your current beliefs and values in relation to … ? What do you want to achieve (goals/targets)? What do you want the students to be able to do (cognitive, affective and/or psychomotor levels)? Evidence based e.g. students work, behaviour, skills … What are your concerns about implementation? Who is evaluating the PD and how?	Interviews, focus groups, questionnaires e.g. Survey using open ended questions, rank order or rating scales to be used for planning and evaluating PD experiences. Informal practices e.g. standing on a line or placing a peg on a line to represent your current level of knowledge, skills or efficacy e.g. lacking confidence - highly confident.	Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) King 2014 Sumsion et al. (2015) Poekert et al. (2020) Lee etal., 2021 Audisio et al. (2022)

Figure 2. Experience and context constructs in the professional learning meta-model.

Table 2. Planning and evaluating PL: PD experience.

Planning PD experiences
PD experience	Possible questions to be explored	Data gathering methods	Example
Design features	What PD activities, experiences and/or model do teachers need to gain the required growth or knowledge, skills, attitudes etc? Does the model of professional development match the intended goal? Coherence: Are the goals predetermined or negotiated with teachers? Are the goals aligned with external factors e.g. standards, policies … ? Is the content aligned with teachers’ or school needs and/or system needs? Is there a focus on ‘how’ to teach (pedagogy and PCK)? Is it research/evidence-based in terms of impact on students? What knowledge and skills will be needed to facilitate teacher learning-practice? Is the PD within the teacher’s Zone of Proximal Development? Is the PD design structured, feasible, focused and evolvable? Does the experience allow for active learning? Does the experience allow for collective participation? Is there a focus on individual and collective responsibility for student learning? Is the experience for a sufficient duration to support teacher learning-practice? Is there a need for an external provider or facilitator or is the expertise available in-house?Is the type of facilitation evolvable? Is leadership for PL planned to support teacher learning-practice? Is there a need for coaching or mentoring to support teachers or PL facilitators to support teacher learning-practice, reflection, and enactment?	Checklists or rubrics Interviews Fidelity of implementation tables Questionnaires Observations (video/audio)	Desimone (2009) Cordingley (2015) Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) McChesney (2022) Schachter (2015) Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) Merchie et al. (2016)
Learning processes and theories	Which learning theories and processes will support the intended goal e.g. social constructivist, situated, self-determination theory Does the professional development experience support situated and collaborative learning? Does the professional development experience support problem identification and solutions for enactment? Does the professional development experience support teacher agency and autonomy? Which learning theories might support teacher learning-practice e.g. situated and experiential learning, social constructivist theory, self-determination theory, complexity theory, hope theory, empowerment theory etc?	Checklists or rubrics Interviews Fidelity of implementation tables Questionnaires Observations (video/audio)	King and Holland (2022) Liou and Canrinus, 2020 Snyder et al. (2003) Dewey (1916) Ryan and Deci (2006) Holland (2021)

Figure 3. Professional learning meta-model with context, experience, and outcomes (CEO) constructs.

Table 3. Planning and evaluating PL: Outcomes.

Outcomes	Possible questions to be explored	Data gathering methods	Example
Student Short-term Long-term	Affective: What were the students’ attitudes and dispositions in relation to the new practices? Cognitive: How are student performance and attainment following the new practices? Psychomotor: What new skills and behaviours did students develop or enhance following the new practices?	Interviews, focus groups with students, questionnaires, formal assessments, pre- and post-intervention testing, Field-notes Portfolios Self-reports and/or Observations	Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy: Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Bloom’s Taxonomy | Centre for Teaching Excellence | University of Waterloo
Teacher Short-term Reactions Learning Practice Long-term Personal/professional identity	Are teachers generally satisfied with the overall PD experience, content, duration, opportunity for dialogue, venue, facilitators, time for reflection … ? What knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs were acquired, enhanced, or affirmed? Were expectations and goals met? How would you describe teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and efficacy toward new knowledge, skills, and/or practices? How would you describe the quality of use and understanding of new and improved knowledge and skills: non-use, orientation, preparation, technical, accepted, critical, or discontinued? Did the PD experience allow for problem identification and solution? Did the learning and/or practice diffuse to other adults/students in the school or in other schools?	Quantitative and qualitative methods e.g. pre-, during, and post-intervention testing, interviews, focus groups, observation, questionnaires, or a combination of these. Verbal feedback video recordings Written reflections Videos of practice	King 2014 Poekert et al. (2020) Hall and Hord (1987) Ahadi et al. (2021)
School Collective Organisational	Did the PD experience support situated and collaborative experiential learning, agency and teacher autonomy? What forms of collaborative practice followed engagement with the PD experience e.g. development of PLCs, CoPs, peer observation … ? Is there evidence of collective responsibility for student outcomes? What, if any, new or improved processes were devised following the PD experience e.g. a new approach to needs analysis … ? What products, if any, arose from engagement in the PD e.g. an improved or new policy … ?	Documentary analysis, focus groups, questionnaires, or a mixture of these	King 2014 Poekert et al. (2020) Merchie et al. (2016) Ahadi et al. (2021)
System/Community	How has the PD experience influenced the operations and culture of the governance system in which a school operates? Did the PD experience lead to more engagement with or other impacts on the community? Did the PD experience lead to collaborations with other schools or Higher institutions? Did the PD experience lead to collaborations with other support services e.g. libraries, psychology services, speech and language services?	Quantitative and qualitative methods e.g. pre-, during, and post-intervention testing, interviews, focus groups, observation, questionnaires, or a combination of these.	King 2014 Poekert et al. (2020) Merchie et al. (2016)

Figure 4. Professional learning meta-model – system-level example.

Figure 5. Professional learning meta-model – school-level example.

Figure 6. Professional learning meta-model – teacher-level example.

Opfer, V.D. and Pedder, D., 2011a. Conceptualizing teacher professional learning. Review of educational research, 81 (3), 376–407. Available at. doi:10.3102/0034654311413609.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Opfer, V.D. and Pedder, D., 2011b. The lost promise of teacher professional development in England. European journal of teacher education, 34 (1), 3–24. Available at. doi:10.1080/02619768.2010.534131.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Strom, K.J. and Viesca, K.M., 2020. Towards a complex framework of teacher learning-practice. Professional development in education, 47(2–3), 209–224, 10.1080/19415257.2020.1827449, Available at

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Boylan, M., et al., 2018. Rethinking models of professional learning as tools: a conceptual analysis to inform research and practice. Professional development in education, 44 (1), 120–139. Available at. doi:10.1080/19415257.2017.1306789.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Rawdon, C., et al., 2020. Developing an evaluation framework for teachers’ professional learning in Ireland: phase 1 Desk-based research. Dublin: Educational Research Centre.

 Google Scholar

Brennan, A., King, F., and Travers, J., 2019. Supporting the enactment of inclusive pedagogy in a primary school. International journal of inclusive education, 25 (13), 1540–1557. Available at. doi:10.1080/13603116.2019.1625452.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

King, F., 2016. Teacher professional development to support teacher professional learning: Systemic factors from Irish case studies. Teacher development, 20 (4), 574–594. Available at. doi:10.1080/13664530.2016.1161661.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Poekert, P.E., et al., 2020. Leadership for professional learning towards educational equity: a systematic literature review. Professional development in education, 46 (4), 541–562. Available at doi:10.1080/19415257.2020.1787209

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Audisio, A., et al. 2022. Does teacher professional development improve student learning? Evidence from Leading educators’ teacher Fellowship Model, EdWorkingpapers.com. Annenberg Institute at Brown University. Available at Accessed: 12 September 2022 https://www.edworkingpapers.com/ai22-597.

 Google Scholar

Merchie, E., et al., 2016. Evaluating teachers’ professional development initiatives: towards an extended evaluative framework. Research Papers in education, 33(2), 143–168, 10.1080/02671522.2016.1271003, Available at

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Clarke, D. and Hollingsworth, H., 2002. Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching & teacher education, 18 (8), 947–967. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00053-7.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sumsion, J., et al., 2015. Evaluative decision-making for high-quality professional development: cultivating an evaluative stance. Professional development in education, 41 (2), 419–432. Available at. doi:10.1080/19415257.2014.989257.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Lee, J., et al. 2021. Influences on User engagement in online professional learning: A Narrative Synthesis and meta-analysis. Available at: Accessed: 3 March 2023 https://journals-sagepub-com.dcu.idm.oclc.org/doi/10.3102/0034654321997918.

 Google Scholar

Desimone, L. 2009. Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward Better Conceptualizations and Measures - Laura M. Desimone, 2009. Available at: Accessed: 3 March 2023 https://journals-sagepub-com.dcu.idm.oclc.org/doi/10.3102/0013189X08331140.

 Google Scholar

Cordingley, P. .2015. A world-class teaching profession. Available at: http://www.curee.co.uk/files/publication/%5Bsite-timestamp%5D/A_World_Class_Teaching_Profession_Feb_2015-publish.pdf.

 Google Scholar

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., and Gardner, M. 2017. Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute [Preprint]. Available at: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf.

 Google Scholar

McChesney, K., 2022. The design and impact of professional development activities in a diverse international education reform context. Teaching & teacher education Available at, 119, 103882. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2022.103882.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Schachter, R.E., 2015. An Analytic study of the professional development research in early Childhood education. Early education & development, 26 (8), 1057–1085. Available at. doi:10.1080/10409289.2015.1009335.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

King, F. and Holland, E., 2022. A transformative professional learning meta-model to support leadership learning and growth of early career teachers. International journal of leadership in education, (0), 1–25. Available at. doi:10.1080/13603124.2022.2037021.

 Google Scholar

Liou, Y.-H. and Canrinus, E.T., 2020. A capital framework for professional learning and practice. International journal of educational research, 100. 101527. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.101527.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Snyder, C.R., et al., 2003. Hope theory, measurements, and applications to school psychology. School psychology Quarterly, 18 (2), 122–139. Available at https://doi.org/Dew

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dewey, J., 1916. Democracy and education: an Introduction to the Philosophy of education. Columbia: Columbia University Press.

 Google Scholar

Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L., 2006. Self-Regulation and the problem of Human autonomy: Does psychology need Choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74 (6), 1557–1586. Available at. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00420.x.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Holland, E. 2021. Physical Education Cooperating Teachers in a Community of Practice in Ireland: Participatory Action Learning Action Research. PhD. University of Birmingham. Available at: https://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/11331/13/Holland2021PhD_Redacted.pdf.

 Google Scholar

Hall, G.E. and Hord, S.M., 1987. Change in schools: facilitating the process. In: Hall, G.E., Hord, S.M. eds. SUNY Series in Educational Leadership. Publication Sales: SUNY Press, State University of New York-Albany, SUNY Plaza.

 Google Scholar

Ahadi, A., et al., 2021. Evaluation of teacher professional learning workshops on the use of technology - a systematic review. Professional development in education, (0), 1–17. Available at. https://doi.org.dcu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/19415257.2021.2011773.

 Google Scholar