What's changed? Issues of impact and evaluation in primary science professional development

Abstract

This article reports on issues arising from the external evaluation of a teacher development project -the Active Learning in Primary Science (ALPS) project -undertaken in eight Bristol (UK) primary schools during 2007. The ALPS project aimed to raise pupil attainment in science by developing participating teachers' skills, knowledge and enthusiasm through a programme of centre-based CPD, classroom workshops, in-school consultancy and visits to a hands-on science centre. The evaluation used a combination of documentary evidence, pupil performance data, teacher interviews and observations to gain a view of the strengths, weaknesses and impact of the programme. This raised questions concerning the timing of such evaluation studies, the tensions between the agendas of the various stakeholders and the validity of any short-term apparent gains in pupil performance or teacher attitude. The article problematises the current UK government emphasis on 'measuring impact' from CPD activity.

Engaging school teachers and school principals in an action research in-service development as a means of pedagogical self-awareness

“…Additional research has correlated the use of investigation and reflective practices with the development of teachers' professional consciousness (Jacobs, Assaf, and Lee 2011;Lee 2009;Snoek and Moens 2011;Stanulis and Ames 2009;Trent 2011), the improvement of student outcomes (Crippen et al 2010;Davies 2010) and improvements in the teaching procedure (Langdon 2011;Pedder and Opfer 2011;Strand and Bosco-Ruggiero 2011). The specific investigation and research practices suggested in the above articles included the following: the individual trial and testing of different practices during the teaching procedure; the trial and testing of different practices in collaborative communities of practice with the aim of enhancing the teaching procedure; the regular collection of data on the progress of the children by their teachers in relation to the educational methods and practices that teachers used; the use of portfolios and other reflective tools; and dialogue between the educators on different educational issues based on the data collected.…”

“…More specifically, Helmer et al (2011) found that the teachers who had regular and substantial contact with teachers' advisors had better students' learning outcomes than their colleagues who did not receive feedback so often or did not use the feedback given. In the study of Davies (2010), consultancy support resulted in the enhancement of participants' subject leadership skills in taking a more proactive role in leading change, including action planning, monitoring science teaching and attainment, planning and leading staff meetings, and analysis of pupil assessment data.…”