Professional development Archives - Page 2 of 2

The Three Cs of TAFE – Collegiality, compassion, and collaboration

Melissa Preston highlights the role of collegiality, compassion, and collaboration within the context of teaching in TAFE. . .

The education landscape is constantly evolving, and Technical and Further Education (TAFE) institutions play a pivotal role in imparting vocational skills and knowledge to students. TAFE teachers are instrumental in ensuring the quality of education and the success of these institutions. Among the numerous factors that contribute to the effectiveness of TAFE, collegiality, collaboration, and compassion are key. The importance of these three interrelated aspects, within the context of TAFE teaching, highlights their role in enhancing peda/ andragogical practices, teacher development, student outcomes, and the overall learning environment.

Collegiality encompasses a sense of camaraderie, mutual respect, and shared responsibility among colleagues. For TAFE teachers, this means cultivating an environment of open dialogue, constructive feedback, as well as a willingness to collaborate for the betterment of teaching practices and student learning outcomes. Effective collegiality fosters a supportive culture where teachers can learn from each other’s experiences, share innovative teaching strategies, and collectively address challenges. This sense of unity enhances job satisfaction (Louis & Kruse, 1995) and promotes a positive work environment, thereby contributing to teacher retention rates within the demanding TAFE landscape.

Collegiality not only enhances the professional growth of teachers but also has a direct impact on student outcomes. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) support the idea that schools (and by extension, TAFE institutions) with a strong sense of collegiality tend to perform better academically. Collaborative planning and curriculum development ensure that courses are aligned with industry standards and meet the evolving needs of students. Furthermore, by engaging in peer observation and feedback, TAFE teachers can enhance their peda/andragogical skills and provide students with more effective learning experiences.

Collaboration extends the concept of collegiality by emphasising joint efforts to achieve common goals. In the context of TAFE, collaboration is not confined to year-level or faculty interactions; it extends to interdisciplinary teamwork that can lead to comprehensive and holistic learning experiences for students. Hattie (2012) argues that teacher collaboration has a substantial impact on student achievement. Collaborative endeavours allow TAFE teachers to pool their diverse expertise and perspectives, resulting in well-rounded educational experiences for students. In TAFE, collaboration becomes particularly significant as it helps bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical skills required in the workforce.

Through interdisciplinary collaboration, TAFE teachers can create complete learning experiences that simulate real-world scenarios. For instance, a collaboration between an automotive and business teacher could lead to the development of a project where students design a business plan for an auto repair shop. Such collaborative projects not only expose students to multiple facets of their chosen field but also foster critical thinking and problem-solving skills. By simulating workplace dynamics, collaboration among TAFE teachers prepares students for the challenges they will encounter in their careers.

In considering how to create positive and nurturing learning environments, compassion refers to the genuine care and concern that TAFE teachers show towards their colleagues and students. TAFE students often come from diverse backgrounds and face a variety of barriers to learning – including neurodiversity, cultural diversity, and damage to the affective domain – therefore, compassion plays a pivotal role in creating a supportive and inclusive learning environment. Teachers who exhibit compassion tend to be more attuned to the needs of their students and can ‘cherry pick’ between andragogy and pedagogy to tailor their teaching approaches and accommodate different learning styles and abilities.

Furthermore, compassion among TAFE teachers contributes to a positive workplace culture. Overall, when teachers feel valued and supported, they are more likely to be engaged, motivated, and committed to their roles. This sense of belonging enhances job satisfaction and reduces burnout, which is a common concern not only amongst the mainstream teacher cohort, but the TAFE teacher cohort (Ingersoll, 2003). Compassionate teachers are also more open to collaboration and knowledge sharing, fostering an atmosphere of continuous learning within the institution.

The potent combination of collegiality, collaboration, and compassion among TAFE teachers yields a multitude of benefits that extend beyond the individual teacher and student. Firstly, a culture of collegiality promotes a strong sense of unity among the teaching staff, leading to improved communication and teamwork. This ensures that curriculum development is comprehensive and aligned with industry demands. Collaborative planning and assessment also facilitate the identification of areas needing improvement, allowing for timely adjustments to teaching strategies. Secondly, collaboration among TAFE teachers encourages the sharing of best practices and innovative teaching methods. When teachers collaborate across disciplines, they can incorporate different perspectives into their teaching, resulting in more comprehensive and engaging lessons. Moreover, collaborative projects for students from different courses and faculties encourage interdisciplinary thinking and problem-solving skills, reflecting the complexities of real-world work environments. Lastly, compassion for colleagues and students contributes to a positive institutional climate. When TAFE teachers model empathy and understanding, students are more likely to feel comfortable and motivated in their learning journeys. Compassionate teachers also serve as mentors and role models, inspiring students to pursue their goals and overcome obstacles. Furthermore, a compassionate work environment promotes teacher well-being and retention, which is essential for maintaining institutional stability and long-term growth.

While the importance of the 3Cs – collegiality, collaboration, and compassion – among TAFE teachers is clear, there are challenges to achieving and maintaining these aspects within the TAFE environment. Limited time for collaboration, untenable teaching loads, gatekeeping of information, partially or poorly implemented ICT systems and heavy hierarchies of management hinder effective collaboration and communication despite these being core values of TAFE. The 3Cs can sometimes be overshadowed by burdensome administrative tasks and procedures that are, unfortunately, intrinsically linked to the Government’s funding model of TAFE which only serve to compound curriculum pressure. To address these challenges, TAFE must implement strategies such as dedicated time for collaborative planning, adequate and high-level professional development and interdisciplinary workshops, as well as meaningful mentorship programs. TAFE also demonstrates a reluctance for these to occur on a face-to-face- basis which demonstrates management’s inability to understand that fundamentally education is a social activity. The current ad hoc approach and mishmash of platforms designed for business, not education, further act as inhibitors for teachers to share best practices and partake in the 3Cs. Furthermore, fostering a culture of empathy and appreciation through recognition programs can reinforce compassionate behaviour among TAFE teachers, but again they must done in a way that is authentic.

Collegiality, collaboration, and compassion hold immense significance among TAFE teachers, fostering an environment conducive to effective teaching and student success. Collegiality forms the basis of mutual support and professional growth; collaboration leverages diverse expertise to enhance student learning experiences; and compassion nurtures positive learning environments and teacher well-being. The integration of these three aspects not only benefits teachers and students but also contributes to the overall growth and success of TAFE institutions. By acknowledging and prioritizing collegiality, collaboration, and compassion, TAFE institutions can create a culture of excellence that prepares students for the challenges of the modern workforce.

Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional Capital: Transforming Teaching in Every School. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Hattie, J., 2012. Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Routledge.

Ingersoll, R., 2003. Is there really a teacher shortage? A Research Report Co-sponsored by The Consortium for Policy Research in Education and The Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy https://www.gse.upenn.edu/pdf/rmi/Shortage-RMI-09-2003.pdf

Louis, K.S. and Kruse, S.D., 1995. Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Melissa Preston is a teacher at TAFE NSW. Her specialities include neurodiversity and LLND. The youngest daughter of migrants, Melissa came to teaching late in life after finishing her first degree in 2018. Prior to this Melissa spent nearly 20 years as a qualified financial planner and bank manager.

As the only permanent full time teacher between Canberra and Sydney, Melissa has a large geographic footprint and is proud to teach, learn and live on Ngambri, Ngunnawal and Gundungurra country. She predominately teaches on the high school equivalency programs, as well as the occasional specialist program.

Melissa has been active in the NSW Teachers Federation since joining the teaching profession and credits her sanity to activism and the collegiately, compassion and collaboration that it brings to her teaching practice.

Melissa-Preston-JPL-18 Download

A Primary Teacher’s Guide to the ‘new’ Mathematics Syllabus K-6

Catherine Myson-Foehner provides a guide to the new Mathematics Syllabus K-6…

The price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change

Education is evolving rapidly, driven by a strong faith in the ‘magic’ of research. Inside the classroom we keenly feel this maelstrom, with seemingly constant changes to not only what students learn, but how, why and where they learn. In 2023, all NSW primary teachers are either trialing, or implementing, the reformed mathematics syllabus. Being given a new road map to your job in any field of work is a stressful and confusing time. It takes energy because things that ran on automatic pilot now demand attention to detail and thoughtful interaction. And change takes from teachers that one resource which is always in shortest supply – time. As teachers, we have a broad set of mandated goals. We must improve student achievement, but also take the lead in tackling social problems such as poverty, inequality, complex fast-paced change and fragile mental health. The new tasks thrust upon us require new approaches, new understandings, and above all, a closer relation between practice, research and theory.

And therein lies the story of our new syllabus.

Why change the syllabus?

There are three main drivers of syllabus reform.

Firstly, we are failing to meet our own national education goals. In 2019, Education ministers agreed on a vision of education for all young Australians under the Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration (Education Council, 2019). The first goal is: ‘The Australian education system promotes excellence and equity.’ This means a commitment to ‘provide all young Australians with access to high-quality education that is inclusive and free from any form of discrimination’ (Education Council, 2019). And yet in our schools and classrooms, academic achievement is still tied to wealth, to gender, to indigeneity. By Year 9, students from the lowest quartile of socioeconomic advantage are roughly 3 years behind students from the highest quartile. And startlingly, for each 25% of wealth and social capital, you lose a year in mathematical achievement. Moreover, how is it possible that in 2021 the gender gap in Year 3 NAPLAN numeracy was the widest yet of any test in favour of boys at 2.52 months? (Thomas, 2021)

Secondly, the NSW Curriculum review (Department of Education NSW, 2022) voiced concern that Australian students’ level of mathematical achievement appears to be in decline. Analysis of PISA data suggested that Australian students have slipped from being some of the highest performers in mathematics to being near the OECD average. Reforming the curriculum was seen as essential step in ensuring all students are challenged and engaged to maximise their individual capabilities and potential.

Thirdly, and crucially for us as teachers, a major driver of syllabus change was our own feedback to the NSW Curriculum Review – that the curriculum ‘contains too much clutter, with not enough time to focus on deep learning’

These three factors, contextualized by the fast pace of educational and social change, brought about an inevitable reform to our curriculum. It is essential we reflect on the ‘why’ of the reform as we implement these changes because, as teachers, its success rests in our hands. The syllabus always was, and always will be, the basis for all teaching and learning programs. Until it is enacted in our classrooms, the attempts to support higher achievement, to untie educational destiny from socio-economic status, gender and indigeneity, and to (eventually) reduce our workload, will fail. We are mandated to carry out the reform and we can use it to illuminate possibilities for the way mathematics is taught and learnt in our classrooms.

The key changes

The structure and content of the syllabus was adapted to reflect current evidence on what makes good teaching and learning. The key changes are:

clearer, more explicit outcomes for what students are to know, understand and do,
more deliberate and careful sequencing of content K -6 with a reduction of content and repetition, and a focus on connecting knowledge
greater emphasis on mathematical reasoning, with one overarching Working mathematically outcome K-6
increased opportunity for students to apply their knowledge.

The syllabus now sits in a purpose-built, digital portal. Online links provide continuously updated resources such as teaching advice, vocabulary guides, assessment resources, and content examples. This framework of support is essential viewing because it provides context and support for teaching and learning. A resource tab provides tailored support such as work samples, professional learning opportunities, and parent/carer guides.

Explicit goals for what students are to know, understand and do.

To make it easier to identify what students need to know, the Mathematics K-10 syllabus has been streamlined and the content described in simpler, more precise language. Stage statements have been removed, reflecting the fact that content within a stage of learning represents what students ‘typically’ know, do and understand. The change acknowledges that students can have different learning trajectories and teachers are best placed to make decisions on student learning goals.

Syllabus content remains organised into three conceptual areas: ‘Number and algebra’, ‘Measurement and geometry’ (previously ‘Measurement and space’) and ‘Statistics and probability’. There are clearer expectations for students’ developmental progression in relation to foundational concepts such as place value, additive and multiplicative relations, and fractions. Focus areas have been renamed to make the learning content more explicit. For example, in K-2, Addition and Subtraction has been replaced with ‘Combining and separating quantities’, moving to ‘Additive relations’ in Years 3-6. This shifts the focus from treating addition and subtraction as two separate mathematical processes to examining the relationship between them. Similarly, Multiplication and Division is now ‘Forming groups’ in K-2, moving to ‘Multiplicative relations’ in Years 3-6.

Each focus area is also accompanied by teaching advice to assist with programming and lesson design. The advice covers aspects such as possible misconceptions, developmental progression, and interrelationships with other mathematical concepts. To clarify teaching and learning goals, appropriate content points have drop downs which provide unambiguous examples.

Student goal setting is supported through a tight integration of assessment resources. The K-2 syllabus has key progression point tasks in Representing number, Combining and separating quantities and Forming groups. To provide a direct link between observable behaviours and syllabus outcomes, National Numeracy Learning Progression V3 (ACARA, 2020) are tagged to syllabus content from K-10. Teaching advice supports the development of assessment tasks by helping teachers understand where students are on the trajectory of learning. Linked assessment resources provide a range of strategies to monitor student progress and identify areas where additional support may be needed. Underlining a strong focus on equitable outcomes, sample access points are integrated for students with complex disabilities who are working towards Early Stage 1 outcomes.

The content is more deliberately sequenced and connected.

The new syllabus draws on contemporary research to redesign the way we identify, introduce and progress key concepts. Content within, and across, focus areas has been realigned and sequenced to improve the progression of learning and build stronger schemas of understanding. Purposeful connections have replaced isolated repetition. For example, in Measurement and geometry, content relating to time and mass now fall together under Non-spatial measure, emphasising the different conceptual approach required to measure things we can’t see or touch. Volume now falls under Three-dimensional spatial structure as a natural connection to how we describe and quantify objects.

Many of the changes reflect that ‘skills and knowledge for focus areas often develop in an interrelated manner and can be addressed in parallel’(NESA, 2022). For example, patterning is a basic mathematical skill that enables students to sequence, see order and make predictions. It underpins all mathematical relationships from the memorisation of the counting sequence to spatial thinking and geometry. Being able to identify the repetition of a unit is the basis of multiplicative thinking. Therefore, it just makes sense to liberate ‘Patterns and Algebra’ from its isolated outcome in the 2012 syllabus and entwine it in all focus areas.

Fractions are another (particularly striking and important) example of how making connections explicit can drive changes to the way we teach, and students learn. We know that almost all students find fractions challenging, and almost all teachers find fractions challenging to teach. Research suggests ‘a student’s proficiency with fractions is directly related to the conceptual and procedural interweaving they make over a long period of time’ (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022).

To support this, the ‘Fractions and Decimals’ outcome from the previous syllabus has gone from K-2, and fractional understanding is woven into Forming groups and Geometric measure. The emphasis is on conceptual understanding of the whole, and its relationship to the parts, rather than on fractions as a number. Of the three different fraction models – linear (partitioning a length or line), area (partitioning whole shapes or areas) and discreet (partitioning a collection) – the area model is the most challenging. The parts must be equal (‘exactly equal’), and students must understand that a shape or object has many different attributes and that only some of them contribute to the measurement of area (for instance – not colour, not orientation, not position). K-2 students are slowly building their ability to estimate and compare area by superimposing shapes, using indirect comparison and, finally, by using grid overlays. Introducing fractions through halves and quarters of shapes assumes students already have a deep understanding of this challenging concept. Indeed, the typical objects we halve (apples, pizzas, leaves, playdough) are often not halves in terms of their mass or volume, and only ‘about half’ in terms of their size. We are inadvertently contributing to the misconception that one out of two pieces is a half, rather than focusing on the equality of the parts and their relationship to the whole.

The new syllabus, therefore, introduces halves through collections when forming groups, and half (and about half) of lengths in Geometric measure. Students are then introduced to the focus area Partitioned fractions (or fractions as parts of things) in Stage 2, in preparation for representing quantity fractions (or fractions as numbers) in Stage 3.

All of these changes are framed by an increased focus on reasoning. Opportunities for students to reason are tagged to relevant content, and teachers are supported to engage students in mathematical reasoning activities through linked teaching advice. Research suggests that ‘children’s mathematical reasoning might be the mediator between social background and children’s mathematics’ (Nunes et al, 2009). If we are serious about closing the equity gaps in mathematical achievement, this is the place to start.

The focus on reasoning informs the move to a single, overarching Working mathematically outcome. It emphasises the interrelationship of the processes that make up working mathematically – understanding and fluency, problem solving, reasoning, and communicating through mathematical language and models. When teachers feel pressured, they often revert to more traditional teaching methods which don’t address mathematical reasoning. It seems like a more efficient way of getting through the content. Yet having students listen to, share, and make sense of their classmates’ reasoning is vital to building and maintaining a focus on mathematical understanding. For example, learning multiplication facts by rote can be helpful but many students are never able to recall them all accurately. In a classroom where reasoning and communicating is expected, students have to clarify and organise their thinking about the multiplicative relations underlying fact families. This helps them identify important mathematical connections and build fluency through understanding. That most incorrectly remembered multiplication fact, 6 x 8, can then be accessed or checked through more familiar facts such as (6 x 4) + (6 x 4), or (7 x 6) + (1 x 6).

Implementation Support

There is no shortage of support for teachers to engage with the new syllabus. NESA has an online learning portal, NESA Learning, which deals with all aspects of the new curriculum. The NSW Department of Education has a wide range of professional development opportunities, as well as on-demand support through Statewide staffrooms and Curriculum networks. A complete set of sample units for Mathematics K-2 Syllabus can be downloaded from the Universal Resource Hub. A selection of sample units for Stage 2 and Stage 3 are also available, with the rest being released in a phased manner into 2024.

However, after all the professional learning is done and all the resources are downloaded, the most important thing will be those discussions in stage meetings, in the staffroom, in classroom doorways and at student desks. It is here that we, as teachers, will really begin to ‘work mathematically’, exploring, connecting, choosing, applying, reasoning, and communicating newly acquired syllabus content knowledge, reflecting on our beliefs about successful teaching practices and illuminating our own way forward. The best advice I have? A cut and paste from Jenny Williams’ and Mary-Ellen Betts’ words of wisdom for teacher approaching a previous ‘new syllabus’ in 2014: “Open the syllabus and read it.”

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2020). National Numeracy Learning Progression Version 3. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/resources/national-literacy-and-numeracy-learning-progressions/version-3-of-national-literacy-and-numeracy-learning-progressions/ accessed 20 May 2023

Clinton, W. J. (1994). Public papers of the Presidents of the United States, William J. Clinton. Washington, DC :Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records

Department of Education NSW (2022). About the Reform. NSW Government https://education.nsw.gov.au/teaching-and-learning/curriculum/nsw-curriculum-reform/about-the-reform accessed 20 August 2023

Education Council (2019). Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration. https://www.education.gov.au/resources/alice-springs-mparntwe-education-declaration

NSW Education Standards Authority (2022) Mathematics K-10 Syllabus https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/syllabuses/mathematics-k-10-2022?tab=course-overview

Nunes, T, Bryant P, Sylva K and Barros, R (2009) Development of Maths Capabilities and Confidence in Primary School. University of Oxford.

OECD (2019). Programme for International Student Assessment Results PISA 2018: Australia, accessed 28 February 2023

Thomas, D. (2021). NAPLAN 2021: Making sense of the reading, numeracy, and writing results https://readwritethinklearn.com/blog/naplan-2021-results/ [website], accessed 14 June 2023.

Australian Government Department of Education (2022) reSolve: Maths by Inquiry [website], accessed 12 August 2023.

Williams, J and Betts, M (2015) How Goes the New K-6 English Syllabus? Journal of Professional Learning, Centre for Professional Learning, S1, 2015

Catherine Myson-Foehner has held classroom teacher and executive roles in NSW schools. She is currently employed by the NSW Department of Education as a Teaching and Learning Officer within the Educational Standards Directorate. She assists in the development, implementation and evaluation of innovative approaches to planning, programming and assessment for primary mathematics teachers.

Catherine has a strong educational interest in curriculum development and its impact on student equity. She worked on the K-2 and 3-6 writing teams for the K-10 Mathematics syllabus and delivers professional learning for teachers on syllabus implementation, including workshops at the Centre for Professional learning.

Catherine-Myson-Foehner-JPL-18 Download

Do Not Try This Alone: The Importance of a Professional Learning Collective

Professor Tony Loughland and Professor Mary Ryan explain why teacher collective efficacy is a vital part of their professional learning and how its use influences students’ learning and development…

Do Not Try This Alone

When Tony and Mary started their teaching careers last century there were many lone ranger teachers in the schools where they worked. These lone rangers were often very good practitioners who preferred to work their magic in their own classroom. You didn’t often see them in the staffroom but their students were happy, the parents did not complain and the school executive were generally of the view that “if it ain’t broke it don’t need fixing”.

There were also teachers and executive staff back then who were very generous in the sharing of their practical wisdom. This generosity was much appreciated by Tony who struggled to teach students with English as an Additional Language or Dialect (EAL/D) backgrounds in inner city Sydney, especially given he had just completed six semesters of enthusiastic and expert teaching of the whole language model of teaching English K-6 in his pre-service education degree.

The collegiality of these colleagues extended to observing them in class, team teaching, sharing programs and resources, affirmation of our small wins as novice teachers and generally making us feel like we might succeed at this profession one day. Their collegiality gave us an enhanced sense of our efficacy as an individual teacher and promulgated a general sense of collective efficacy that we can teach these students well in our school.

There is strong support in the research literature that students thrive when teachers have a positive sense of their self-efficacy as individual teachers as well as a strong sense of their collective efficacy as a stage, faculty, team and school. We argue in this paper that the motivational sources of collective teacher efficacy provide a useful framework for the development and evaluation of professional learning programs at the school level.

The Compelling Evidence for Pursuing Collective Teacher Efficacy

Teachers’ sense of their collective efficacy is the second most important school-based influence on student outcomes. It has an effect size of 1.57 on student achievement according to Hattie’s synthesis of 1200 meta-analyses relating to influences on student achievement (Hattie, 2015). An effect size of this magnitude demands the attention of school leaders and researchers invested in teacher professional learning, “Given the link between collective efficacy and student achievement, understanding collective efficacy in and of itself is a worthy endeavour” (Berebitsky & Salloum, 2017, p.2). This study sought to develop an in-depth understanding of the antecedents of teacher collective efficacy in their professional learning.

Collective efficacy is an extension of the construct of self-efficacy from the broader theoretical framework of social cognition. Collective efficacy is defined as “the extent to which people believe they can work together effectively to accomplish their shared goals” (Maddux & Gosselin, 2012, p.214). Social cognition assumes reciprocal causality exists between a person and their environment, “people respond cognitively, emotionally, and behaviourally to environmental events. Also, through cognition people can exercise control over their own behaviour, which then influences not only the environment but also their cognitive, emotional, and biological states” (Maddux & Gosselin, 2012, p.199). This reciprocal causality has positive implications for teacher collective efficacy as it creates a virtuous cycle of improvement where enhanced collective efficacy contributes to student achievement which then further strengthens collective efficacy (Goddard et al., 2000).

The motivational sources of teacher collective efficacy are mastery and vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and affective states.¹ Teacher collective efficacy is also enhanced by a team’s ability to analyse the task ahead and make a judgment on their current level of competency to complete the task. All these characteristics represent what is regarded in the literature as effective teacher professional learning. However, teacher collective efficacy has not been commonly associated with a theory of action for teacher professional learning as it has been predominately employed as an outcome measure of the health of a school’s collective culture.

We contend that the measurable construct of teacher collective efficacy can be used as a design framework for professional learning programs as well as being an evaluative measure of its effectiveness. We acknowledge that the question of whether teacher collective efficacy is a necessary antecedent condition for effective professional learning, or a consequence of these programs remains open. We suspect that there might be reciprocal causation between teacher collective efficacy and effective professional learning where the presence of both enhances the other.

The Importance of a Professional Learning Collective

This last section of the paper examines the confluence between the motivational sources of teacher collective efficacy and the principles of effective teacher professional learning (see Table 1 below)

Sources of Teacher Collective Efficacy	Principles of Effective Teacher Professional Learning
Mastery experiences	Collaborative. Iterative. Focus on teachers’ work
Vicarious experiences	Collaborative. Focus on teachers’ work
Social persuasion	Collaborative
Affective states	Collaborative

Table 1 Collective efficacy, principles and design of teacher professional learning (Loughland & Ryan, 2022, p.345)

What is missing in the hypothesised model in table 1 is an explication of the processes that create the conditions for effective collaboration. One influence on effective collaboration and learning relates to time constraint and leadership support (Park & So, 2014). We have another clue to this missing piece of the puzzle in the finding that the density of networks is more important than centrality in professional learning networks (Berebitsky & Salloum, 2017). Furthermore, the density of networks is significantly related to collective efficacy in schools (Berebitsky & Salloum, 2017). This suggests that more opportunities should be provided for purposeful learning interactions between teachers as depicted in the principles of teacher professional learning in Table 1. This suggests that effective teacher professional learning needs to involve more interaction between teachers than top-down delivery approaches that may be better suited to compulsory compliance training. We know that time for professional learning in schools may be limited so school leaders must make informed decisions on what model of professional learning to adopt in their school.

The literature strongly suggests that a model of school-based, interactive teacher professional learning that focuses on teachers’ work in the classroom is the most effective (Kennedy, 2016). In this model, outside help in the form of academics and experienced practitioners in the system, is introduced if and when they are needed.

We suspect that the arguments we have presented in this paper are not earth-shattering revelations for the readers. The principles of effective teacher professional learning are now well established in the literature. The challenge that remains is one of implementation.

The challenges we identify here are very real to many teachers who are reading this article. There is the serious challenge of finding time for meaningful professional learning in the hectic schedules of schools. There is the conflation between the legislative requirements of compulsory compliance training and the real opportunities for professional growth afforded by effective teacher professional learning. There is the pervasive legacy of the cargo cult model of professional learning where the external consultant, the latest edu-guru, the international keynoter, or the social media superstar are regarded as experts and saviours. Valuable professional learning time is spent listening to them instead of engaging with your colleague next door on meaningful pedagogical discussion on how your students’ learning may be enhanced tomorrow, next week and next term.

Our own post-graduate university courses at the Masters and Higher Degree Research levels are also not exempt from our criticism. Our MEd and EdD programs need to be more adaptive and responsive so that they might produce educators with the scholarly and practical wisdom that they can use to provide the best possible conditions for student success in the schools and systems where they work.

None of these challenges are insurmountable but they require school and system leaders to build cultures of professional learning in schools that create a sense of collective teacher efficacy among their staff. Surely that is not too much to ask in an institution whose core business is learning?

End note:

¹ Mastery experiences are those that focus on developing instructional skills and capabilities. The important goal of improving student outcomes in wellbeing and achievement is at the forefront. Vicarious experiences are those whereby teachers and leaders learn from each other. Social persuasion involves a shared sense of purpose and vision, and a collaborative eﬀort to achieve those goals. Aﬀective states are the social-emotional aspects that underpin eﬀective relationships, including trust, respect and dialogic approaches that value all voices and contributions. A positive relationship between these motivational constructs and collaborative professional learning has been found (Durksen et al. 2017).

NB- Sections of this text have been taken from Tony and Mary’s published journal article (Loughland & Ryan, 2022) that can be found here https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1711801 (available to access through an academic institution or paid download)

Berebitsky, D., & Salloum, S. J. (2017). The Relationship Between Collective Efficacy and Teachers’ Social Networks in Urban Middle Schools. AERA Open, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417743927

Durksen, T. L., Klassen, R. M., & Daniels, L. M. (2017). Motivation and collaboration: The keys to a developmental framework for teachers’ professional learning. TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION, 67, 53-66. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.05.011

Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Hoy, A. W. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312037002479

Hattie, J. (2015). The applicability of Visible Learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 79-91. https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000021

Kennedy, M. M. (2016). How Does Professional Development Improve Teaching? Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 945-980. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626800

Loughland, T., & Ryan, M. (2022). Beyond the measures: the antecedents of teacher collective efficacy in professional learning. Professional Development in Education, 48(2), 343-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1711801

Maddux, J. E., & Gosselin, J. T. (2012). Self-Efficacy. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of Self and Identity. Second Edition (Second ed., pp. 198-224). The Guildford Press.

Park, M., & So, K. (2014). Opportunities and Challenges for Teacher Professional Development: A Case of Collaborative Learning Community in South Korea. International education studies, 7(7), 96-108.

Tony Loughland is an Associate Professor and Deputy Head of School (Research) in the School of Education at the University of New South Wales.

Tony is an experienced educator who likes to think that theory should be the plaything of practice. He agrees with Marx’s assertion that philosophy should be used to not only interpret the world but to try to change it. Tony subscribes to Marx as he believes this orientation towards research is vital in a world threatened by anthropocentric climate change. Tony is currently leading projects on using AI for citizens’ informed participation in urban development, the provision of staffing for rural and remote areas in NSW and on Graduate Ready Schools.

Mary Ryan is Professor and Executive Dean of Education and Arts at Australian Catholic University. Her research is in the areas of writing pedagogy and assessment, teachers’ work in, and preparation for, diverse classrooms, reflexive learning and practice, and reflective writing. She was formerly a primary teacher and lecturer in literacy and English and has an extensive record of program development in universities and professional learning for teachers. Her funded research projects are in the areas of classroom writing and preparing teachers to teach for diversity to break the cycle of disadvantage.

Dont-try-this-alone Download

Subject: Professional development

The Three Cs of TAFE – Collegiality, compassion, and collaboration

Melissa Preston highlights the role of collegiality, compassion, and collaboration within the context of teaching in TAFE. . .

References

About the author