| « IBM Lotus Symphony - free! | Meme: Random things » |
Leon has just published an interview he recorded where we talked about a range of topics but mainly focussed on the possibilities for teacher professional development.
Amazingly, (and I am flattered), he even quoted me in a column he wrote for the Guardian this week. In it he discusses an approach to teacher CPD that is characterised by a focus on the needs of the school & the teacher. Not imposed from outside. He's talking in the context of using ICT effectively, but this approach should be true across the board.
It's interesting that he notes that Building Schools for the Future has concentrated on the "stuff" - the hardware & environment - and missed out the CPD angle.
Interesting because Laurie O'Donnell from LTS has recently been comparing the Scottish education system with Singapore. Both appear to have put learning at the top of the priority list - for both teachers & students - with technology coming later.
3 comments
I like the use of the word “imposed". That’s my major beef with top down development programmes. Perhaps the reason that BSF is focusing on the “stuff” is because the plan is to empower teachers to embark on a CPD approach that is owned and driven by the teachers themselves, rather than being “imposed” and the stuff is there to facilitate and accommodate…? We can hope!
I am really glad that you are being mentioned nationally - because, despite your modesty - you have been quietly doing what everyone else only talks about: ie - finding ways to make CPD truly continuous, partly through use of online technologies.
As you know, I am very much in favour of making CPD a condition of professional status. Not that there are not HUGE issues in assessment and tracking - but teachers should be required to provide evidence (as we ask of pupils , with online portfolios) of their ongoing learning.
Almost all other professions and all health care professionals (from OTs, Physios to Consultants) have to submit periodic evidence to get their professional status confirmed.
Although it would be great if teachers just took part because of the ‘goodness’ of the activity - this is not enough of an incentive (as you and I found while working with the National Strategies!).
Having spoken to the TDA and the GTC about this - they are strongly in favour - but because of a lack of open debate around this topic (and some fear of union reaction - and the likely politicisation of the discourse) they have maintained the status quo.
Perhaps the edublogging community needs to engage with this and show how professionals can keep this a sane and rational transition towards a supported and progressive CPD culture.
Karyn, yes, you’re right - we shouldn’t be looking to impose particular CPD approaches. However, I also agree totally with Eylan. If teachers want to be treated seriously as a “profession", they should be part of a system that requires evidence of professional development. That requirement should be linked to their ongoing licence to practice.
