Unlocking Teachers’ Knowledge About School Improvement

• In Event: Mobilizing Teachers’ Research Knowledge: School Improvement in Leeds, United Kingdom

Abstract

1. Objectives of presentation
This paper aims to explore the exchange and use of teachers’ knowledge about contextualized school improvement in this pilot study school, across the city of Leeds but also in the English jurisdiction, where it has been ‘locked away’ (Pollard and Oancea, 2010) in a highly regulated system. The objectives are to (a) peruse the existing ‘Leading Learning’ project initiative for its contribution to supporting teachers find their authentic voice; (b) examine the enabling conditions for teachers’ CPD and classroom enquiries; (c) investigate the support lent to the school in dealing with the enduring issues of the effects of poverty and deprivation.

2. Overview of presentation
This paper provides a critical friend’s perspective on the team’s efforts to build knowledge-of-practice (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 2001, 2009) about under-achieving white British pupils. It reviews their readings (Lupton, 2004, 2006; Sveinsson, 2009), their constructive response to the charge of being below national ‘floor targets’ at that stage (Wrigley, 2003; Thrupp, 1999, 2005), and their strategic thinking about a responsive teacher research agenda and teacher research activities (Mentor et al, 2011; Campbell, McNamara and Gilroy, 2006). This informs critical constructive feedback on what they have done, including their contribution to the subsequent rise in attainment.

3. Methods, techniques, or modes of inquiry
An inquiry stance (Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 2001, 2009) is likewise modeled in the role of critical friend concerned to see research-based CPD for teachers and research- and evidence-informed practice as reliable reference points for contextualized school improvement (Wrigley, 2011). The concern is to critique managerialism and the limitations of performativity to raise standards in the English system and elsewhere (Harris and McGregor, 2005), and foreground the teachers’ knowledge about what it is that the school needs regarding redesign & regeneration of its curriculum and pedagogies (Hayes et al, 2005).

4. Data sources, evidence, objects, or materials
The author uses records of engagement with the pilot study school as a participant observer in CPD sessions, observations of teacher researchers in pupil focus group interviews, de-briefing sessions with the school’s academic partner, and policy briefings with the local authority; also records of the ‘Leading Learning’ project, shared data from the teachers’ research activity, and transcriptions of digitally recorded CPD sessions.

5. Results and/or substantiated conclusions or warrants for arguments/point of view
The Visiting Professor’s judgement feeds into contextualised school improvement but also the ‘Leading Learning project, and in turn the city’s improvement plan The Leeds Challenge. This enables the reconstruction of more responsive CPD. Further, it provides some evidence for policy deliberations on improving disadvantaged pupil’s achievement and progress locally and nationally.

7. Scientific or scholarly significance of the study or work
This practice and policy feedback is timely, as England clearly struggles with system and school reforms to be internationally competitive. It feeds into current and topical scholarly debates about countries that lead the league tables (Darling-Hammond and Lieberman, 2011). This presentation, reporting on a new initiative, contributes to national and global discussions.

Author

• Terry Wrigley, Leeds Metropolitan University