Innovative Teacher Communities An evaluation Walter Patterson Partners in Learning

1. Innovative Teacher CommunitiesAn evaluationWalter PattersonPartners in Learning

2. Timeline Partners in Learning Feb – Jun ‘06 East Ayrshire Pilot Jun – Sep ‘06 Recruitment of 9 LAs Oct ‘06 Launch / Etienne Wenger Oct ‘06 – Jun ‘07 Phase 1 Jun ‘07 “End of Term” event Sep ‘07 7 LAs engage for Phase 2 Sep ‘07 – Jun ’08 Phase 2 Jun ’08 Project evaluation report

3. Aims Partners in Learning • The overall aim of this project is to build a sustainable community of innovative teachers • To be delivered in each LA by a practising teacher on secondment • Phase 1 focus on developing collaborative environments and identifying training needs • Phase 2 focus on identifying good practice and giving the skills to record and share

4. Pilot Project outcomes Partners in Learning • The pilot project in East Ayrshire established that: • There were benefits from alignment with existing LA initiatives • The secondee could “make a difference” • Teachers benefited from sharing the classroom practice of other teachers • Teachers tended to access training “just in time” • Difficult for teachers to sustain commitment over time

5. Communities of Practice conference Partners in Learning October 2006 Engage with theory of COP Use workshops to flesh out individual LA proposals But … Some LAs not yet fully settled on their project Insufficient experience of COP theory Result… Very few projects made use of formal planning tools to help establish and maintain their COP

6. Engaging with LAs Partners in Learning • A key element of the project was to link the ITC project to other LA initiatives. Typical links were: • Extending the life of existing “masterclass” communities • Glow mentors and Glow Groups pilots • Projects for innovative teachers supported by LTScotland • A “learning community” • Determined to Succeed initiatives • This arrangements has worked well for almost all projects

7. Engaging with LAs Partners in Learning • The benefits from this approach included: • Access to extended set of resources, included other project officers • Inclusion in training activities to improve ICT use in classroom • Building on established group of motivated teachers

8. Communities of Practice Partners in Learning • There were some broader contexts for the project: • Masterclass training over several years (NOF) • Development and roll-out of GLOW (but to limited set of LAs) • Work of LTS, including the annual Scottish Learning Festival • HMIE report on ICT in Learning and teaching • These provided synergy for developing innovative classroom practice

9. Sharing Good Practice Partners in Learning • Overall, the project has been successful in identifying and sharing good classroom practice • Over 50 VCTs already produced (from nursery to senior stages of secondary) • Further 28 VCTs “promised” • Showcased at ITC project events, at SQA, at SLF • Presented at Microsoft ITN events in Philadelphia, Paris, Helsinki and Zagreb • Hosted on SQA website and on LA intranets/blogs • Available (soon) on Microsoft ITN website

10. Maintaining Communities Partners in Learning • The main mechanisms used to initiate and maintain COP: • Conventional • Group meetings (usually twilight) • CPD and training events • Visits to innovative teachers by the secondee • Provision of documentation (reports, policies) • Online • Email • Discussion Forums (such as LTS Forums or Glow Groups) • LA intranets • Blogs / Wikis

11. Maintaining Communities Partners in Learning A COP was initiated at project level, based on an LTS Discussion Forum. This became moribund towards the end of Phase 1 and was not replaced. For those who wished to use Glow Groups (usually as part of LA pilot) there were frustrations and delays For those who opted for LA intranet support there were also frustrations and technical hitches For those who use independent blog/wiki services there were the drawbacks in using a free service on the web Result…….

12. Experiences of online communities Partners in Learning • Not a positive one • With a few exceptions most online communities have started well but have not been sustained over the life of the project. • Marratech VC – where project is about connecting and collaborating • Angus Transition – where use of blog is part of formal monitoring of progress

13. Conclusions Part 1 Partners in Learning • The PIL project sat comfortably with individual LA aspirations for ICT development • The PIL project was synergistic with national initiatives regarding ICT (such as Glow, CFE) • Individual teachers respond well to support and practical advice/help • Individual teachers respond well to seeing how others have done it (VCTs) • Authority-wide projects get the benefits of scale and collaboration

14. Conclusions Part 2 Partners in Learning • Communities of Practice are hard to sustain, especially in online formats • Teachers lack time to develop the competencies and behaviours necessary to participate in a thriving online community • Blogs and wikis tend to “die” • The slow progress of the Glow initiative has brought frustration to many and a disincentive to some