An Evaluation of a Teacher Inquiry Approach to Support School Improvement: Working In

An Evaluation of a Teacher Inquiry approach to support school improvement: Working in Creative Partnerships to support learning and inclusion. A report by the University of Derby on behalf of the Fairfields Teaching School Alliance, funded by the National College of Teaching and Leadership.

1 An Evaluation of a Teacher Inquiry approach to support school improvement: Working in Creative Partnerships to support learning and inclusion.

A report by the University of Derby on behalf of the Fairfields Teaching School Alliance, funded by the National College of Teaching and Leadership.

Author: Dr Val Poultney

Introduction

The aim of the study is to conduct an evaluation project which looks at the effectiveness of a seminar approach to teacher inquiry. Triads, composed of one teacher, a middle and a senior leader from each school attended a seminar day with a follow-up meeting led by an education consultant to assess the effectiveness of their inquiry work and to evaluate its impact back in school.

The objectives of the research are to:  evaluate the efficacy of CPD seminars;  understand in greater depth the role of the Inquiry Project Consultant who has been facilitating the seminars;  explain the effectiveness of feedback mechanisms from the consultant during and in follow-up meetings to the seminars;  to pilot, evaluate and offer a model of teacher inquiry that seeks to engage teachers, middle and senior leaders as part of a triad approach to teacher research.

Rationale for the evaluation research

Fairfields School is part of a wider Teaching School Alliance based in Northamptonshire and is currently one of our partnership schools working with the School Direct (primary) programme. As part of its ongoing Research and Development (R & D) work, the school has successfully bid for a sum of money from the National College of Teaching and Leadership (NCTL) to support, in the first year, a pilot teacher inquiry venture and its subsequent evaluation. The University of Derby has been approached by the Teaching School Manager in respect of conducting a piece of evaluation research following the first year of this project. The Alliance is charged with evidencing impact of this project to its 47 schools. At an Alliance meeting in January 2015 the project was proposed and generally well-received by Alliance member schools. The schools were offered the opportunity to take part in the project at this meeting and subsequently 21 schools took part in the seminars.

The project involves triads of staff from a variety of Alliance primary schools meeting with an educational consultant to focus upon a current issue of concern in their own school. Through the seminar the consultant helps the triad of teachers (normally one classroom teacher, one middle leader and one senior leader) to work through the issue together and with another two triads from two other primary schools. The maximum number of triads in a seminar is normally restricted to three (9 staff in total per seminar). This approach allows teachers to forge their own school networks and with external school colleagues who can offer advice and guidance to them about their inquiry focus/issue of concern. The direction given by the consultant to all groups in the seminar is reminiscent of Harris’ (2003, 2014) plea to give teachers support for undertaking research practices as well as forging the beginnings of a professional learning community or networks which is recognised as good practice by Stoll (2015) and Nelson and O’Beirne (2014).

It is also well documented in the literature (Cordingley & Needham, 2010; Krell & Dana, 2012; Skattebol, and Arthur, 2014) that classroom teachers on the whole value inquiry as a means of developing their own pedagogies, giving licence to discuss teaching and learning and forging local and external professional relationships. The architecture for such ventures has to be supported by learning-focused leaders, namely middle and senior leaders/managers. These school triads aim to bring together all staff who have a focus on improving their classroom pedagogy and opening up the means for teachers to work as researchers in their classrooms. In the spirit of providing on-going support and advice the consultant arranges to visit each triad post-seminar with a view to encouraging triads to stay focused on their inquiry(s), prior to a second seminar meeting where the outcomes of the research are disseminated to each group. Currently the second seminars will begin in February 2016.

In conclusion the Alliance is hoping that this work will give schools the potential for a system-led improvement strategy whereby teachers and their leaders ‘unlock’ their knowledge already held, possibly as tacit. The outcomes of the project may help to build upon three areas of capital: social (networking, connecting knowledge together), knowledge (impact of knowledge, how disseminated, used) and decisional (leadership hierarchy to connect teachers and support inquiry practice) (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2012).There will be a focus on how school leaders encourage and support inquiry processes at different school levels and consideration given to how this impacts on teacher and leader development. It is envisaged that a portfolio of case studies can be built and shared with the Alliance through different dissemination routes when the outcomes of the evaluation of this pilot have become known.

Outline of the research study and methods A sequential mixed methods approach was adopted to allow some flexibility in data collection which is more appropriate to collecting data which is qualitative in nature. The data centred on collecting views of participants engaging in the seminars and their reflections on the follow-up meetings post-seminar. These outcomes will lead to the generation of a ‘triad inquiry model’ and will be evaluated more widely via dissemination routes through the Teaching School Alliance and a published academic paper. We are considering a paper for ‘Professional Development in Education’ published by Routledge as a suitable journal. Table 1 shows the agreed timeline for this research to be conducted and the generation of this report. Fairfields School have already agreed to this timeline and have signed the commercial contract as required by the University of Derby. Ethical approval through the University’s own Research Ethics Committee has had approval.

Table 1: Research schedule detailing data collection and generation of evaluation report.

Date Activity Responsibility Time 02/09/15 Inquiry Project meeting to confirm Val Poultney (Academic lead) 0.5 days data collection processes and Sally Manz (Education consultant) timescales 25/09/15 Complete ethical approval and Val Poultney 0.5 days pilot evaluation questionnaire &

3 focus group interviews Sept 2015 Run pilot questionnaire and make Val Poultney 1 day necessary changes if appropriate Oct 2015 Circulate survey questionnaire to Val Poultney & Sally Manz Deadline for seminar participants (hard copies) return 27/11/15 03/02/16 Focus group interviews: Val Poultney & Sally Manz 2 days 1. With 2 (minimum) consenting participant triads 2. With 2 (minimum) schools who did not attend first seminar March Work on data analysis Val Poultney 2 days 2015 April 2015 Final evaluation report – 4 spiral Val Poultney 1 day bound copies

The choice of methods for this evaluation is based upon gathering as many perspectives of participants in order to assess the efficacy of the seminar approach. We felt that there should be some degree of comparison between those schools unwilling (or unable) to send staff to the seminars or to engage at any level with the project, but were unsuccessful in making contact or gaining access to these schools. Further discussions will be had around the efficacy of reaching non-participating schools as appropriate with the Alliance.

Schools were contacted by email requesting their participation in the research (47 schools) from the contact information provided by the consultant. Two Headteachers kindly agreed to trial the pilot version of the survey questionnaire and as a result a couple of minor changes were made and then emailed to schools where teachers had attended the seminars. This resulted in 16 questionnaires being returned (see Appendix 1) with 2 schools agreeing to be part of the follow-up focus group (Appendix 2). All schools received the consent letter (Appendix 3). The sample is considered purposive, aimed at schools engaging with the seminars and the follow-up visits from the consultant. The challenge to involve busy teachers in research of this type is to be mindful of workloads and access issues and to find spaces in busy diaries. The outcomes of the research are to be read as a preliminary evaluation into what we have learnt about professional learning using triad groupings within the primary school context and what we might change as a result of this learning. Data may also be skewed in favour of those with a keen interest in the CPD issues, and/or those seeking further opportunities in the profession.

Findings

Data were sought around a number of areas, first around teachers’ own approaches to CPD, second, around their views on the seminar approach to CPD, third, their own focus for their inquiry and finally the role of the Educational Consultant. It is important to consider the theoretical perspective underpinning this research and so issues relating to building capital (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2012) will be used to give direction to the presentation of these data.

Figure 1 shows that teachers personally and professionally have a commitment to CPD, with most sourcing CPD from their own schools and fewer seeing CPD as a career opportunity or just as part of performance management.

Figure 1: Teachers’ personal approaches to CPD (survey questionnaire)

Participants shared particular types of CPD with which they had engaged: NPQH (4), University level programmes in Mathematics (Maths Specialist Teacher Programme: MAST) (3), subject specific courses (5) and other leadership programmes (4). Teachers and leaders in the sample valued these programmes for their content as relevant to their current role, the time to consider issues and discuss these with like- minded colleagues. Academic approaches to study were valued for the challenge element and for building confidence in trying out new teaching approaches in the classroom. Many teachers commented on the value of networking and building new contacts externally and the sharing of new knowledge (rather than just information). Time and space to reflect was also an important part of most courses and simply enabling practitioners to stop and think about what they were doing in practice.

Take away 1: what types of professional learning is needed at different stages in a teacher’s life cycle?

5 Figure 2: Teachers’ views on the seminar event (survey questionnaire)

Participants felt strongly that the seminar format was appropriate and gave good opportunities for sharing, networking and engaging with the consultant so that a focus on the school issue could be reached. They had chosen to engage with the seminar for a number of different reasons but mainly around issues to do with improving standards, problem-solving, Ofsted report, evaluation of work done at other primary schools or because they were sent by the Headteacher (2 teachers reported they did not know why!). Those teachers who attended with a particular focus, problem or issue in mind valued the opportunity to collaborate and share ideas with others and to find potential solutions, especially those schools with similar contexts. One group found cause for celebration after the seminar when comparing their professional practice with other schools. Where Heads or Deputies had been part of the triad it was reported that they often ‘stood back’ to allow the other two teachers the opportunity to work on the inquiry but were available to support. Most agreed the triad model worked well and gave everyone a chance to be part of some focused inquiry. Many teachers valued how confident they felt after completing the work and understanding the issue in a little more depth.

Focus group data largely supported the above but revealed that it was sometimes problematic to find triads comprising senior and middle leaders with classroom teachers. Changes to staffing also meant those attending the seminar did not meet with the consultant in the follow-up meeting.

Staff who had been able to agree the constitution of their triad, who worked well together and who were able to link with the focus for the inquiry, prior to the seminar, had demonstrated greater sustainable impact on teaching and learning

Take away 2: consider who will be part of the triad, working relationships, maintaining inquiry over time and overcoming inevitable challenges.

Take away 3: dates, timings and nature of content of seminars need to be organised well in advance so that participants fully understand their aim.

Figure 3: Issues around locating the most appropriate inquiry (survey questionnaire)

Overwhelmingly participants reported the focus for their inquiries were generated from an Ofsted inspection or as a result of an action on the school development/improvement plan (3). Some other issues dominated, such as the changes to assessment coming from Government or those considered by senior leadership teams as important foci for the seminar (3). Focus group data confirmed in some depth the clarity with which Ofsted outcomes had driven selection of a focus. The first seminar was a useful staging point to rehearse how triads might approach their focus using an inquiry approach and to be able to rehearse with other participants the validity of conducting such a study. Linking with the first seminar, event participants were divided as to the worth of the consultant having some input into the decision for the focus, prior to the seminar. Teachers talked about ‘closing down’ the opportunity to rehearse this with others if the focus was decided before the seminar; others wanted more support pre- seminar especially if the original triad had changed in any way (see Take away 2).

Some teachers reported the opportunity for developing a focus has to be right for the conditions for inquiry to take place. One triad from the focus group explained how, at the point when a new Headteacher was appointed, they saw the opportunity to lead on a staff development event which not only impacted positively on the staff but also on the children and support staff. They saw a value in the inquiry, a purpose for undertaking it but were also able to reflect on its challenges: having enough time, resourcing (especially cover), getting everyone on board and energy to keep it going to the end.

Another triad reported on how they had focused their inquiry on a challenge identified with the mathematics curriculum at Key stage 2 and how they had widened their internal networking with a colleague from Key stage 1. As well as developing a cohesive triad way of working, the opportunities for professional development for the classroom teacher especially were evident. Knowledge of both KS1 and KS2 curricula were shared and gave rise to further opportunities for CPD which was also shared with NQTs and informed peer to peer review work.

Take away 4: some consideration of managing teacher expectations for the first seminar through detailing its aims and objectives in more detail.

Take away 5: think about the whole school opportunities for leaders and teachers to work as a triad and how that might help other groups of teachers such as NQTs, RQTs.

Take away 6: in what ways does your school share knowledge (not information)?

Figure 4: Teachers’ perspectives on the role of the educational consultant (survey questionnaire)

One of the key roles for the consultant was her ability to help colleagues focus and refine their intended lines of inquiry. Many seminar participants noted how useful it was (a) to find out what other schools were doing, (b) to discuss different ways of working with those from different schools and (c) use the consultant as a ‘sounding board’ to discuss and rehearse their inquiry focus. They all valued her professionalism and experience of primary schools. The minority of dissenting voices was not negatively

7 critical of the consultant’s role but they were not expecting schools to come with such a large range of ideas and needs.

The following quotes best summarise the skills of the consultant:

…the consultant was great on the day (seminar), steering and managing the conversations and allowing people to have time to share and discuss different ideas (Participant 3).

The questioning and expert advice. I have appreciated the opportunity to speak openly about the project in a safe and supportive environment (Participant 6).

Opportunity to gain feedback and discuss the work we have been doing. Good to get an independent view of the school and to showcase the work we have been doing. Opportunity to discuss the current school development plan and future priorities (Participant 7).

The ability to create a positive working environment where all parties were encouraged to talk openly and freely…brilliant at listening to ideas… she facilitated the meeting well…so that we focused on the most crucial parts of the study (Participant 9)

…her questioning helped us to clarify our thinking and planning (Participant 10).

Take away: how would you plan in advance so that you make best use of a consultant’s time (and get value for money)?

Impact of Triad ways of working and further reflections

Participants were asked to reflect on what impact the seminar and follow-up meetings had back in school and were given the opportunity for any further reflections they wished to share. The main theme emerging from these data is that leadership of any inquiry or initiative is a key component of its successful outcome; participants shared evidence of where, for whatever reasons, changes to staff and especially those in the leadership team had meant the inquiry was now ‘on hold’ or not ‘progressing well’ due to these staffing issues:

‘…the impact is not as great as we hoped for as we have a new Headteacher, now with a slight change of focus required. The plan will happen but more slowly than we hoped for’ (Participant 10). However, for some leaders the very act of attending the seminar has helped with forging working relationships:

‘As a newly formed SLT I feel the experience (seminar) has helped us bond professionally and practice models to ensure school development, in particular the importance of following up actions thoroughly’ (Participant 12).

Working in a triad like this was useful as we could share ideas, question each other and talk through as a team which was very useful (Participant 8)

While most found the triad approach a positive experience, others reported SLT ‘hijacking’ the triad group and making it difficult for those not in a leadership position to have their voices heard.

Take away: consider carefully the composition of the triad and the intended focus for your inquiry: what might be the impact of having a senior leader in the group?

Interestingly nearly everyone reported that the seminar and follow-up meetings with the consultant had had the effect of focusing everyone’s mind on a particular issue, whether that be from an Ofsted outcome or from an issue that had been on the development plan or just a problem such as a low level behaviour issue that had become a whole school priority. Schools attending the seminar are reporting they are adopting the triad model so that the problem is a shared one, in some cases working school wide to disseminate outcomes of a project such as lesson study. Many schools are actively logging data from their inquiries/projects and becoming more aware of the need to monitor groups even when they become a lower priority:

Our data shows EAL children are performing well…although they will now become a lower priority we are very aware we still need to monitor this group closely… The progress of all learners including specific vulnerable groups are discussed and monitored in SLT meetings and in pupil progress meetings with class teachers (Participant 8).

The impact on school improvement issues has largely been positive and an opportunity to evaluate this, especially through the follow-up meetings with the consultant, means quantifiable measures can be put in place, for example through the school action plan. Some schools have reviewed staffing issues following their discussions with colleagues at the seminar event and many have described the collegial approach as ‘positive’, ‘innovative’ and ‘refreshing’. For those starting a new improvement initiative this approach to professional development has made the early steps much clearer and for an SLT group:

…we make time for all teachers and support staff and are committed to using research models to support our learning. The

9 main factor for making this a successful initiative was making time for thinking and follow up’ (Participant 7).

It has been very positive. It has strengthened our SLT and honed our priorities for school improvement by giving us time to reflect, action plan and follow up on the actions (Participant 12)

The following quote probably summarises all the positive comments around this way of working:

It (the seminar) provided a valuable opportunity to work with colleagues in different roles within my own school. It was interesting to look at the school issue from a different perspective. The seminar was well organised and the discussion was effectively facilitated by the education consultant. It was useful to share school issues and find collaborative solutions with the two other schools.

Discussion

This approach to CPD has been found to be largely effective, if we take into consideration the size and range of the sample. The programme has demonstrated that it promotes ways of professionals being able to reflect on practice that include their own development as well as being part of a wider team with a school focus. If teachers are role models for learning then the triad approach has enabled participants to learn about wider school issues, how to work with others in different roles and how to follow up the inquiry when back in school. There is much evidence in the literature (Day, 1999; James, Connolly, Dunning, Elliot 2006; Middlewood and Abbott, 2015) that professional development is an important driver of change in schools, positive impact on curriculum development and a significant factor in retention and recruitment of teachers.

The outcomes of this research demonstrate to some degree the three areas of capital described by Hargreaves and Fullan (2012):

1. Social capital: the success of the triad model in allowing teachers to network and learn new or different forms of knowledge;

2. Knowledge capital: how to use new knowledge, perhaps learnt at the seminar and to be able to evaluate its worth and demonstrate its impact;

3. Decisional capital: essentially understanding how the effects of leadership support a successful triad way of working, what is effective and not effective in terms of leaders being involved in this type of work

Data have reflected the range of different school contexts from which participants have come and which will be a significant factor in the type and way in which CPD is approached in school. However, it is also clear that at the heart of this approach to CPD teachers and their leaders share a passion for learning and the drive to improve the outcomes for the children they teach. The nature of the CPD as relevant to the role-holder is another important consideration and in part there is a need to develop specific skills required for that specific job role. The simplicity of the triad approach means that it can be used in most areas of school life and is not confined to any particular group or job role. The externality of the seminar group appears to have placed a value on the work done by many different role holders, despite some of the challenges posed by leaders’ positional power.

The duality of having internal and external verification or moderation of the focus for the inquiry has been a significant finding in this research. Participants have reported widely about inquiry projects where the triad approach has made a real impact on improving a curriculum area, fostering shared understandings across different primary phases and having support from two other members of staff who ‘have your back’. This approach has been particularly welcomed from less experience teachers and the opportunity to work in a non-judgmental environment where everyone’s point of view is valued. The role of the consultant has been instrumental, not just around organising and conducting the seminars, but also in following up inquiry projects and feeding back on work being done in school. In a time when there is a need for greater efficiency and constant updating, teachers have many concerns about their accountability and performance, all of which may lead to a decrease in morale and attrition issues for the profession. School leaders need to understand that adult learning may only be successful when there is a range of approaches and that one size does definitely not fit all teachers. As well as the individual teacher, professional development has to make impact at a team level, a year group level, a department level and more widely at the whole school level. The triad approach appears to be able to achieve most of these criteria, but, as data suggests, the purpose, aim, who takes part and the management and leadership of the triad is a very important consideration for those engaging with this approach.

Schools may wish to consider the following:

 Teachers value being able to work with other professionals outside of school

 They value CPD which is relevant to them personally and for their role

 The seminar model is a means of externally verifying their work

 The triad composition needs to be carefully planned

 School leaders need to consider their positional power when engaging in this model of CPD

 The seminar approach needs careful planning

 Consideration of the ability of the triad to work together over time

 How best to use consultant’s time in follow-up meetings

 Some deployment of research skills in deciding focus (unless using Ofsted outcome)

11  Everyone agreeing the focus and being prepared to revise it.

 How to monitor and disseminate the outcomes of the inquiry

 Resourcing issues especially cover for staff attending seminars

The consultant and Alliance may wish to consider:

 The timings and organisation of the seminar event

 The aims and purpose of the event

 How to manage teacher expectations of the seminar event

 More informed detail about how schools might compose the triad

 Details about the follow-up visit agreed well in advance

 What changes the Alliance might make in the light of this report

 How to capture some of the very good work being done as part of this approach to CPD Appendix 1: Self-completion questionnaire (to be read in conjunction with Appendix 3)

An Evaluation of a Teacher Inquiry approach to support school improvement at Fairfields School: Working in Creative Partnerships to support learning and inclusion: a self-completion questionnaire (pilot) Thank you for agreeing to participate in this research which is focused on how groups of teachers think about and approach school-based inquiry. Your engagement and time is much appreciated. Thank you.

Participant Consent: Please note that by completing this questionnaire you are agreeing to the following statements:

 I understand that, while information gained during the study may be used for research purposes, I will not be identified personally in the research findings and my personal details will remain confidential. Pseudonyms will be used to report findings from my data and when the research is disseminated.  I understand that data will be stored accurately and securely and will be returned to participants or destroyed after the research/dissemination phase has been completed.  I understand that the work is being carried out in line with the BERA ethical research guidelines (BERA, 2011) and has been granted ethical approval by the University of Derby’s ethics committee.  The nature and purpose of the research project has been explained to me. I understand and agree to take part.  I will be able to withdraw my data up to 4 weeks after the date of return of the questionnaire, my data will be either destroyed or returned to me and I will not be included in this sample.  We are asking for your contact details below so that we may contact you again to request your participation in the focus groups which will be held on your second seminar day in February 2016. If you do not wish to take part then please do not complete this section.

Signature of participant…………………………………. Date……………………….

Background Data

Name ………………………………………………………………………………….

School ………………………………………………………………………………..

School Role ………………………………………………………………………….

Years in current Post ………………………………………………………………………..

Years in Teaching ………………………………………………………………….

Qualifications:

Academic

……………………………………………………………………………………..

13 Professional

…………………………………………………………………………………….

……………………………………………………………………………………

Please circle the most appropriate number according to your preferred level of agreement with each statement for questions 1 – 4.

1. Your approach to Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

Statement Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree Agree Disagree I have a strong commitment to engaging in CPD 4 3 2 1 There are many opportunities for CPD in my school 4 3 2 1 CPD is part of my performance management targets 4 3 2 1 I am undertaking CPD to improve my career opportunities 4 3 2 1 The Alliance provides good range of CPD opportunities 4 3 2 1

In your experience can you describe a CPD opportunity that you felt had particular impact on your practice?

Why was this approach particularly effective for your practice?

2. The seminar approach

Statement Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree Agree Disagree I enjoy working and learning with my own colleagues 4 3 2 1 The consultant helped me to think clearly about my 4 3 2 1 problem/school issue I enjoyed sharing my work and networking with other school 4 3 2 1 colleagues The format (e.g. agenda, timings, organisation) of the seminar 4 3 2 1 was appropriate The informal approach helped us all to engage with the seminar 4 3 2 1 content

What were the reasons you chose to engage with this seminar approach to school improvement issues?

Do you have any further comments you would like to share about the seminar day?

3. Your Inquiry Focus

Statement Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree Agree Disagree It was hard to agree an inquiry focus for the triad group 4 3 2 1 Our triad agreed the inquiry focus from the school action plan 4 3 2 1 Our school issue/inquiry arises from our last Ofsted report 4 3 2 1 We learnt a lot from our seminar colleagues about how we 4 3 2 1 could approach our school issue/inquiry We feel re-energised and ready to tackle our school issue after 4 3 2 1 the seminar

Can you describe how you arrived at your focus for your triad inquiry/school issue that you took to the seminar?

In what way did the seminar help you to make sense of how to approach your inquiry/school issue?

4. The role of the Educational Consultant

Statement Strongly Strongly Agree Disagree Agree Disagree The consultant helped us to refine and improve our 4 3 2 1 inquiry/school issue focus

15 The seminar day was well led and organised throughout 4 3 2 1 The follow-up school meetings have helped to support the triad 4 3 2 1 in their inquiry work More follow up meetings would be beneficial 4 3 2 1 Two seminars per academic year are just about right 4 3 2 1

What part of the Educational Consultant’s role have you most valued and why?

General reflections on the programme so far:

We would very much value any reflections and feedback (both positive and negative) on your experiences of working as part of a triad within the seminar context.

We would be particularly interested to hear about any impact measures you have evidenced in school as a result of working as a triad.

And finally, your thoughts on how this approach to school improvement has worked for you.

Thank you for completing this questionnaire. Please return to Dr Val Poultney: [email protected] before Friday 27 th November 2015. Appendix 2: Focus Group Interviews

To be held on 3rd February with at least three triad groups.

Introduction If available the questionnaires will be returned to those participants who self-identified. Dr Val Poultney will lead the FG interviews and will seek to understand at a greater depth the responses provided in the questionnaire returns, plus any further follow-up questions. In the spirit of Focus Groups it is often difficult to predict the course of discussion but it is helpful to have some preliminary guidance to help prepare the group for the interview. The FG interview will work in two ways, first to examine the experiences of the triads pre-, during and post seminar and to evaluate the effectiveness of the consultant feedback and follow-up meeting and second how the group composition (teacher, middle leader and senior leader) works to realize the potential for making an impact around an agreed inquiry issue. So the Focus group has a specific focus on the content (participants’ evaluation of their CPD experience) and how effectively the triads have worked together and made an impact back in school (Gillham, 2005).

Focus Group Schedule (which broadly follows the questionnaire themes plus any other issues which may arise from the completed questionnaires: 1. Settling the group and making clear confidentiality and withdrawing from the research conditions. 2. Theme 1 explorations: Approaches to CPD. 3. Theme 2 explorations: Why were participants keen to be involved in triad (Teaching and Learning seminar) ways of working and how that continued in school. 4. Theme 3 explorations: Pros and cons of the seminar approach to include scheduling and feedback and current day’s seminar experiences. 5. Theme 4 explorations: Follow-up school visits and how effective, impact and how evidenced in school. 6. Final reflections, follow-up to any questions raised.

17 Appendix 3: Letter of Consent

Dear Colleague, As part of the ongoing work of the Fairfields Teaching School Alliance Research and Development committee we are planning to evaluate a project funded by the NCTL. The Teaching School Alliance Manager, Michael Thompson has already provided information to Alliance members about the how the project will run in a meeting held on 15th January 2015. Schools have been invited to select a classroom teacher, a middle leader and a senior leader (a triad) to two seminars, led by Sally Manz (Educational Consultant). Each triad brings a school issue to the seminar, where it is discussed; debated and potential avenues for overcoming /solving the issue are collected, taken back to school and trialled. In a follow-up meeting with the triad Sally explores to what extent inquiry processes have helped to resolve the issue; followed by a second seminar where triads again share their experiences under Sally’s leadership. This research is looking to evaluate the seminar project, over a course of one academic year, so that we can better understand if the seminar approach to school improvement is a feasible model, how effective the role of the educational consultant and the quality, timing and effectiveness of feedback sessions. The evaluation aims to conclude its work with a model of school improvement that can be disseminated to Alliance members for further engagement and future ways forward. The title of the project is An Evaluation of a Teacher Inquiry approach to support school improvement at Fairfields School: Working in Creative Partnerships to support learning and inclusion. This study is being commissioned and conducted on behalf of the Fairfields Teaching School Alliance by the University of Derby and we would like to invite a sample of you to participate in this study. We hope that you will find being part of the study supportive through the following opportunities aimed at finding out more about your current projects and how we can better help you develop and promote them. Participation involves three requests: 1. In October-November we would like to find out about you and your views on the seminar project through a short questionnaire, for completion and return by email or hard copy. 2. If you are intending to take part in the second series of seminars in February 2016 we would like to encourage you to take part in a small focus group interview which will take place on 3rd February during the seminar day. This will enable us to gain a deeper understanding of your perspectives on this approach to school improvement and your views as to how it might be improved. We would like to confirm that your participation in this study is entirely voluntary. The data you provide will be held securely electronically. In wider dissemination we assure you that your data will be reported in a fully anonymised way, using pseudonyms and ensuring identifying contextual features are removed. The project will be overseen by Dr Val Poultney, University of Derby. If you have any queries about this project please contact Val in the first instance: [email protected] tel: 01332 591 416. We anticipate the final evaluation report will be available around Easter 2016

Thank you for reading through this information and, in anticipation, for your participation.

Val Poultney, University of Derby. 19 References

Cordingley, P. and Needham, K. (2010) ‘School leaders using inquiry and research’ in A. Campbell and S. Groundwater Smith (eds.) Connecting Inquiry and Professional Learning in Education: International Perspectives and Practical Solutions. London and New York: Routledge.

Day, C. (1999) Developing Teachers: The Challenges of Lifelong Learning. London, Philadelphia: Falmer Press.

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

Harris, A. (2014) Distributed Leadership Matters: Perspectives, Practicalities, and Potential. London, New Delhi, Singapore: Corwin: Sage.

Harris, A. (2003) ‘Departmental effectiveness and school improvement’ in Brent Davis and John West- Burnham (eds.) Handbook of Educational Leadership and Management. Edinburgh and London: Pearson.

James, C., Connolly, M., Dunning, G. and Elliot, T. (2006) How Very Effective Primary Schools Work. London, Thousand Oaks California, New Delhi: Paul Chapman Publishing.

Krell, D. E. And Dana, N. F. (2012) ‘Facilitating action research: a study of coaches, their experiences, and their reflections on leading teachers in the process of practitioner inquiry’. Professional Development in Education 38(5) 827-844.

Middlewood, D. and Abbott, I. (2015) Improving Professional Learning Through In-House Inquiry. London, New Delhi, New York, Sydney: Bloomsbury.

Nelson, J. and Beirne, C. (2014) Using Evidence in the Classroom: What Works and Why? Slough: NFER.

Skattebol, J. and Arthur, L. M. (2014) ‘Collaborative practitioner research: opening a third space for local knowledge production’. Asia Pacific Journal of Education 34(3) 351-365

Stoll, L. (2015) 10 tips for successful school-led research projects. https://nctl.blog.gov.uk/2015/02/16/10-tips-for-successful-school-led-research-projects/ Accessed July 2015.

About the author

Dr Val Poultney is a Senior Lecturer at the Institute of Education, University of Derby. Her research interests are focused on teacher inquiry, evidenced-based teaching and school leadership, especially middle leadership. Val teaches on postgraduate and School Direct programmes and supervises many students engaged on the Doctor of Education programme (EdD) and PhD students in Education. She has published on secondary school middle leadership, Governance, school improvement and researching teachers.