Teaching Scotland’s Future
Working in partnership - a strengthened model of professional learning through the
mentoring process
Coaching and mentoring to support professional
review and development/professional update
Dr Cate Watson
Dr Alison Fox
University of Stirling
Mrs Jean Cessford
Perth & Kinross Council
November 2013
1
Contents
Executive Summary
3
Rationale and Project milestones
4
Introduction
5
Focus Group findings
5
Developing the training package
6
Trialling and evaluation
7
Dissemination
8
Next steps
8
Evaluation of processes of partnership working
8
References
9
Appendix 1.
10
2
Executive Summary
Exploratory discussion with Perth & Kinross, who are currently piloting Professional Update
(PU), indicated a need for greater knowledge, skills and understanding around
coaching/mentoring to support this process. The aim of this project was to develop
materials, including e-resources, for supporting coaching/mentoring within PRD/PU and to
explore pedagogies for enhancing engagement with these materials.
A working group was set up to address the issues raised, comprising staff of P&K (CPD
Coordinator, ICT officer, and two seconded teachers) together with two academic staff from
the School of Education, University of Stirling.
The initial stage involved gathering the perceptions of those undertaking preparation for PU.
A focus group drawn from teachers involved in the pilot training for PU (all of whom had
previously carried out PRD interviews) indicated that those individuals with experience in
coaching/mentoring were more confident to undertake the role, while those with little or
no experience felt some trepidation. However, there was some concern that time to
undertake necessary training would be made available. In addition, differences emerged
over the definition of the terms ‘coaching’ and ‘mentoring’ and the relative importance of
each to PRD/PU.
Following on from this the working group met to devise a training package to support the
development of staff about to lead a colleague through the PU process.
This package focused on developing knowledge and understanding of the place of coaching
and mentoring within the PU process, along with an introduction to the necessary skills.
The materials were designed to encourage the generation of appropriate coaching
questions for use in PU/PRD reviews using fictional exemplars.
A pilot twilight training event was organised for staff about to undertake PU reviews (see
Appendix 1). The materials were trialled with this group. Participants worked in pairs/triads
taking on the role of PRD interviewer/interviewee. The package was supported by
introductory reading prior to the session and discussion within the session. Feedback was
gathered about ways in which the package might be used. Evaluation was positive with
participants indicating that even in the very short time available they had been able to
devise appropriate coaching questions. It was strongly felt that the package was best used
collegially, within departments, schools or across clusters.
The findings from the project were reported at the Scottish Learning Festival
(September,2013), where further positive feedback was received in relation to the materials
developed, and at the National Implementation Board Conference (October, 2013).
A meeting was requested with Education Scotland (ES) to discuss the project and to inform
next steps. It was decided that ES would take forward the project, producing a package of
the materials, including video clips/voice overs, to be placed on the ES website for use by
schools.
3
Coaching and mentoring to support professional review and development
(PRD)/professional update(PU)
Rationale and aims of the project
Exploratory discussion with Perth & Kinross (P&K), who are currently piloting Professional
Update, indicated a need for greater knowledge, skills and understanding around
coaching/mentoring to support this process. The aim of this project was to develop
materials, including e-resources, for supporting coaching/mentoring within PRD/PU and to
explore pedagogies for enhancing engagement with these materials.
Agreed Milestones
1. Initial meeting with P&K partners to identify issues raised by the Professional Update
pilot programme in relation to development needs of coaches/mentors. Work
together to develop project plan under guidance of advisory panel (Dr Morag
Redford, Dr Valerie Drew, University of Stirling, Ms. Anne Pearson, Falkirk Council).
By 31.03.2013
2. Work with P&K partners to explore, with focus groups currently undertaking the
pilot, their perceptions of PRD/PU processes, their role as coach/mentor within it,
and how they may best be supported to undertake professional update effectively.
By 30.04.2013
3. In conjunction with P&K partners, including seconded teaching staff and ICT
personnel, develop coaching/mentoring training for staff tasked with carrying out
PRD/UP, including: consideration of the extent and nature of training to be given;
the development of sustainable approaches to training; and the development of eresources to support aspiring coaches/mentors. By 31.05.2013
4. Pilot these materials with the next cohort undertaking training for PRD/PU to
determine effective pedagogies for developing coaching/mentoring skills, knowledge
and understanding. By 30.06.2013
5. Evaluation of effectiveness of materials and e-resources and impact of these on
knowledge, skills and understanding in relation to coaching/mentoring and PRD/PU
processes. By 20.09.2013
6. Evaluation of processes of partnership working. By 20.10.2013
7. Further refine materials and e-resources. Submission of completed materials and
resources to Education Scotland. By 15.11.2013
4
Coaching and mentoring to
development/professional update
support
professional
review
and
Introduction
Exploratory discussion with Perth & Kinross, who are currently piloting Professional Update,
indicated a need for greater knowledge, skills and understanding around
coaching/mentoring to support this process. The aim of this project was to develop
materials, including e-resources, for supporting coaching/mentoring within PRD/PU and to
explore pedagogies for enhancing engagement with these materials.
A working group was set up to examine the issues raised and devise a response comprising
staff of P&K, Jean Cessford, (CPD Coordinator), Pam Currie (ICT officer), Avril McNeill
(teacher seconded from P&K) and Keri Reid (teacher seconded from P&K) together with Drs
Alison Fox and Cate Watson from the School of Education, University of Stirling.
It was decided that:




A focus group would be recruited from staff undergoing preparation for PU reviews
to gauge the needs and perceptions of the processes involved
A training package of materials would be put together to support the development
of coaching/mentoring skills
The package would be evaluated by the next cohort of staff undergoing training for
PU
Materials would be further developed for use by Education Scotland (ES).
Focus Group findings
The questions put to the focus group were:







What in your experience makes for a good PRD interview?
How has PU affected the PRD process?
What do you think the impact of PU will be on school?
Do you see any tensions in the process?
Is a coaching/mentoring approach appropriate?
Do you feel confident in your role in the process?
What more support might you need to carry out the role?
The focus group emphasised the importance of establishing the correct environment for the
interview; being well-prepared and having sufficient time set aside.
There was a clear awareness of the link between PRD and PU. It was felt that PU provided a
‘bigger picture’, an overview of development over a longer timescale, with PRD being a
‘mini step’ in the process. The actual processes involved were regarded as being the same.
Both PRD and PU were seen as being about identifying strengths. There was also a feeling
that PU would make people ‘take it [PRD] a bit more seriously’.
5
One member reported that PU will enable a more coherent and sustained approach to be
taken to CPD in school, with the impact of CPD being able to be evaluated more clearly.
Different implications were noted for undertaking PU in primary and secondary schools,
mainly linked to resource issues.
At present PU was not seen as ‘high profile’ in schools. It was clearly understood that PU
was not linked to competence procedures, though some members of the group felt it would
make individuals ‘more accountable’.
Some confusion was apparent between the terms coaching and mentoring, though most of
the language used was around ‘coaching’ rather than ‘mentoring’. Whichever term was used
the outcome should be to challenge the reviewee to find their own solutions rather than
providing answers. One member said that developing coaching skills had enabled her to lead
more effective PRD interviews which previously she had ‘dreaded’.
Those with experience of undertaking PRD interviews and particularly those who had
received training in coaching/mentoring felt reasonably confident to undertake PU, whereas
others expressed some trepidation.
Some members of the group who had not received coaching/mentoring training felt that
this would be essential, though they were concerned whether the necessary resources
would be available to all those who needed it.
Developing the training package
Following on from the focus group meeting the working group met to devise a training
package to support the development of staff about to undertake PU reviews. (See Appendix
1).
The GTCS recognises coaching and mentoring as an effective way to approach professional
review and development. The package was developed on the basis of a conceptual framing
which understands coaching/mentoring as ‘learning relationships that which help people to
take charge of their own development’ (Connor and Pokora, 2012, p.8). Within the
approach devised here learning is understood to be a social and distributed activity leading
to the enhanced accumulation of social and human capital. It was therefore agreed to
produce a package of materials focusing on coaching/mentoring to support effective
PRD/PU reviews and which could be used collegially by a school/faculty or department etc
to support reviewers and reviewees to develop coaching/mentoring as part of the process
of PRD/PU .
Key issues were therefore to devise materials that would support development of
understanding and skills of coaching/mentoring; and that could be used/downloaded from
the online environment to enhance flexibility of delivery.
This materials produced made use of the existing P&K PRD/PU proformas (in P&K referred
to as ERD, Employee Review and Development) as a means to enable participants to
develop coaching questions. Fictional exemplars were drawn up for this purpose which
aimed to cover a range in terms of sector, career-stage, stage in PU cycle etc. The exemplars
6
were deliberately designed to raise particular issues and presented somewhat ‘exaggerated’
situations. The package was supported by introductory reading prior to the session.
Questions for discussion within the session about the principles and processes underpinning
PU were also devised (see Appendix 1).
The session comprised:




A number of preparatory tasks including a reading as an introduction to
coaching/mentoring and familiarisation with the processes of PU on the GTCS
website.
An introductory discussion to gauge level of understanding around the purpose of
PU.
During the session participants worked in pairs/triads using exemplar P&K PRD/PU
forms, using these to draw up coaching questions (a prompt sheet was available) and
then taking roles as coach/coachee (and observer for triads).
A plenary discussion and evaluation of the materials.
A group of 11 PU reviewers nominated to undertake PU in their school in the coming session
took part in a twilight event.
No prior knowledge of PU or coaching/mentoring was assumed.
Trialling and evaluation
The materials were trialled with this group and feedback was gathered about ways in which
the package might be used. Participants worked in pairs/triads taking on the role of PRD
interviewer/interviewee using the exemplar materials. The materials were evaluated by the
participants and feedback was very positive. Even in the very short time available
participants were able to devise appropriate coaching questions. It was strongly felt that the
package was best used collegially, within departments, schools or across clusters.
In the introductory discussion participants were asked about their understanding of the
purpose of professional update. Views about the purpose of PU clustered around two
aspects: accountability and personal development. Thus, PU was seen to be about ensuring
standards and improving the quality of teachers and teaching and learning. But it was also
seen as a means for supporting professional development. Little tension was apparent
between these aspects of PU, though one participant spoke of PU as ‘competence related’
and of the ‘tension between the hard line of the standards and the supportive role of PU’.
Training materials and the session were evaluated by means of a PMI
(Plus/Minus/Interesting). Overall, participants valued the opportunity to practice the
coaching skills and the dialogue the exemplars generated. Main problems were lack of time
to prepare for the session, and the timing of the session at the end of a very busy day.
Some felt the exemplars were rather complex and could be simplified.
During the plenary session ways in which the materials could be used in the online
environment were discussed. Overall, it was felt that the materials would best be used in a
7
collegial rather than an individual way. There should therefore be a package available for
download which could be used by a group of teachers working together. This might be a
small group of staff or could involve a whole school, or with teachers working across
schools. The package could include suggestions for different ways to use the materials.
Audio or video clips of coaching/mentoring sessions were felt to be useful.
Dissemination
Dissemination of the findings of the project took place at the Scottish Learning Festival (SLF)
(Edinburgh, September, 2013), where Keri Reid and Avril McNeil demonstrated the role-play
exemplars; and the National Implementation Board Conference (Edinburgh, October, 2013).
Feedback from the SLF indicated that participants would value these materials being
available on the ES website for use in schools together with guidance, including video clips,
demonstrating their use.
Next steps
Following evaluation, the exemplars were further refined to be taken up and used as an eresource by Education Scotland.
A meeting was held at University of Stirling attended by Kate Paton and Jayne Horsburgh
(Education Scotland), Alison Fox, Cate Watson (University of Stirling), Avril McNeil and Keri
Reid (Perth and Kinross Council) to discuss the e-resources produced and the means by
which these might be made available for use by schools. It was agreed that the project
would best be taken forward by Education Scotland who will commission a film company to
produce video clips of Avril and Keri using the exemplar materials in role play scenarios. Keri
and Avril will also ‘talk through’ the materials explaining the rationale behind them. Alison
Fox and Cate Watson will introduce the package, make some suggestions for how it can be
used and raise some issues for discussion.
Evaluation of processes of partnership working.
Overall, the project has achieved considerable impact. Beneficiaries of the project include
policy-makers at local/national level; schools through support for PRD/PU; and the
university through developing closer links with a partner local authority. Impact has been
conceptual, informing current debate around PRD/PU; instrumental through the
development of materials to support PRD/PU; and capacity building in both institutional and
personal terms through the strengthening of engagement between the University and P&K
secondment of LA staff and the secondment of teaching staff to work on the project.
Outputs to support PU/PRD have been developed, trialled and further refined so that they
may be utilised on the ES website. Opportunities for dissemination to government, policymakers and practitioners were created at the Scottish Learning Festival (Edinburgh,
September 2013)and the NIB, ‘Teaching Scotland’s Future’ Conference (Edinburgh, October
2013). It is envisaged that the materials, once available, will continue to impact across
8
schools in Scotland. The work also enabled a critical analysis of the development and
implementation of professional update (Watson and Fox, in press).
Within the partnership there was a sharing of expertise, knowledge and skills to mutual
benefit. The project produced insights into the different perspectives, priorities and
practices of the respective partners and the impact all this has on working in partnership
(Glasby et al, 2011). Overall, however P&K benefitted from access to latest academic
thinking and the University gained insight into practicalities of coaching and mentoring in
the context of Professional Review. Both partners also benefitted from the development of
capacity and capability of personnel with one of the seconded teachers (Keri Reid)
subsequently taking up a post as Teacher Fellow in the School of Education at the University
of Stirling. Time expectations of the project in terms of a completion date within the annual
school cycle and the pilot for Professional Update limited what could be achieved and the
loss of Pam Currie who changed jobs part way through the project impacted on the extent
to which the materials could be developed by the partnership for the online environment.
Overall however this was a very good example of what partnership working can achieve and
a significant amount was accomplished within a very short space of time
While the existence of a good working relationship built up over a number of years between
P&K and University of Stirling was instrumental in enabling the project to go ahead (given
the tight time scale for putting the proposal together) there is no doubt that these
relationships were strengthened as a result of undertaking the project. However, such links
are not between organisations but between people and the loss of key personnel (Jean
Cessford, CPD Coordinator, retires in November 2013) will certainly alter the nature of the
partnership in the short term. This finding supports evidence that successful partnership
working is frequently contingent on local circumstances (Eccles, 2012). Indeed, the success
of the project was in large part due to the appointment of the staff seconded to work on the
project. The project therefore contributed towards building capacity and capability both for
the partnership and for the individuals involved.
References:
Connor, M. and Pokora, J. (2012) Coaching and mentoring at work. (2nd edition). New York:
McGraw-Hill/Open University.
Eccles, A. (2012) Partnerships. The politics of agendas and policy implementation. Pp. 24- 39
in J. Forbes and C. Watson (eds) The transformation of children’s services. Examining and
debating the complexities of inter/professional working. London: Routledge.
Glasby,J., Dickinson, H. and Miller, R. (2011) Partnership working in England – where we
are now and where we’ve come from. International Journal of Integrated Care , 11,
URN:NBN:NL:UI:10-1-101274.
Watson, C. and Fox, A. Professional re-accreditation: constructing teacher subjectivities for
career-long professional learning. (In press, Journal of Education Policy.)
9
Appendix 1.
Coaching and mentoring to support professional update
Welcome to Professional Update training for reviewers from Perth & Kinross. The aim of
Professional Update is to support and enhance teacher professionalism and forms part of
the Professional Review and Development cycle. Coaching and mentoring are seen as key to
the success of PRD and PU so it is important that reviewers have some understanding of
these processes. This session therefore aims to provide an introduction to coaching and
mentoring to enable you to carry out effective reviews for Professional Update.
We have attached chapter one of Coaching and mentoring at work. Developing effective
practice , by Mary Connor and Julie Pokora, that you may find useful preparation for the
session. Please read at least pages 1-16. This section of the chapter discusses some basic
ideas about coaching and mentoring, defining these terms and setting out the nine
principles for effective practice. Of course, you may read the whole chapter if you wish,
either now or following the session.
We would also like you to familiarise yourself with the GTCS website and what it says about
professional update (http://www.gtcs.org.uk/professional-development/professionalupdate.aspx). A useful powerpoint presentation about PU is available at:
http://www.gtcs.org.uk/web/FILES/professional-development/professional-updatepresentation.pdf
Having read the chapter and familiarised yourself with the GTCS website think about these
questions and jot down a few notes:



What are the aims of PU?
Why is a coaching/mentoring approach appropriate for this?
How do coaching and mentoring differ? What are the implications of these
differences for PU?
Finally, consider where you are now:
 What experience do you have of coaching and mentoring?
 What experience do you have of PRD reviews (as either a reviewer or a reviewee)?
What do you need to know about PU? What skills do you need to develop in order to
conduct an effective PU review?
10
11