This article was downloaded by: [Case Western Reserve University]On: 06 November 2014, At: 10:51Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

British Journal of In-Service EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjie18

Collaborative INSET Using Supported Distance LearningC. K. Turner a & J. Broughton ba University College , Swansea, United Kingdomb Tasker Milward School , Haverfordwest, Dyfed, United KingdomPublished online: 12 Sep 2006.

To cite this article: C. K. Turner & J. Broughton (1994) Collaborative INSET Using Supported Distance Learning, British Journalof In-Service Education, 20:1, 109-120, DOI: 10.1080/0305763940200111

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305763940200111

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

British Journal of In-service Education, Vol. 20, No. 1, 1994

Collaborative INSET UsingSupported Distance Learning

C. K. TURNERUniversity College, Swansea, United KingdomJ. BROUGHTONTasker Milward School, Haverfordwest, Dyfed, United Kingdom

Introduction

This paper sets out to show how a group of seven schools in SouthWales, the local authority of Dyfed and the Department of Education,University College, Swansea, have successfully collaborated to produce anovel form of school-based in-service training using supported distancelearning materials. The focus of the in-service training was managementself-development for middle managers.

Rationale

For any sort of school-based in-service training to be effective inimproving performance, a suitable underpinning of relevant theory andthe establishment of a framework of delivery which takes account of allthe relevant research are required. According to Wallace (1991), "littleresearch has been carried out on how school managers learn to achievetheir tasks in school" (p. 17). Obviously the most effective training amanager can have occurs when an in-service training course is intimatelylinked to the course participant's own professional experience anddevelopment needs. Wallace goes on to note that "a long-standingconcern of trainers has been the gap between what is learned on anexternal course and changing performance in the job" (p. 20). To bridgethe gap, the student needs to realise that the content and context of theactivities undertaken during the training process are closely related totheir job experience. This so-called 'transfer of learning' seems to occur

109

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

C. K. TURNER & J. BROUGHTON

most effectively, according to Rackham & Morgan (1977), when thestudent can perform new skills in the specific context of their use, i.e. inthis case in the classroom or within the department. This idea wasclearly understood by Hall & Oldroyd (1991) when they designed theirdistance learning materials, since the activities invariably require thestudent to reflect on some aspect of how they manage their own work.However, more work is required before any claims can be substantiatedregarding the student's changed performance as a teacher/manager as aresult of doing the course.

The work of Joyce & Showers (1988) has been influential informulating ideas about effective in-service training. Their work showedthat presentation of the theory and demonstration of new skills willcertainly raise awareness and increase student understanding but havelittle or no impact on classroom practice. The most effective trainingmethods include the practice of new skills or techniques, feedback onperformance and coaching on-the-job. Coaching implies directobservation of one teacher by another who then both engage in mutualfeedback and discussion to evaluate what has happened. This is notnormally possible in schools on a regular basis so an alternative strategywas developed whereby a small group of students from the same schoolwould meet regularly to discuss the activities and exchange information,resources, etc. INSET coordinators were asked to convene meetings ofthe students in each school to provide the essential follow-up supportwhich is vital if the desired effect of transfer of learning is to occur.

Figure 1. The Kolb learning cycle, where CE means Concrete Experience, used as abasis for observation and reflection; RO means Reflective Observation, involvingasking questions, thinking about possible solutions; AC means Abstract Concepts,involving observations into a theoretical framework; and AE involves using thesetheories to guide decision-making and action.

The distance learning materials themselves were written with anemphasis on action learning whereby the students were asked to examinetheir management of time or to clarify their own management style. Thetheoretical underpinning of this sort of approach owes much to the workof Schon (1983, 1987) who developed the notion of 'reflection-in-action'.He suggested that professionals learn effectively when they seek

110

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

COLLABORATIVE INSET

solutions to on-the-job problems supervised by a more experiencedpractitioner. Kolb (1984) refined this approach further with his theory ofexperiential learning which was conceived as a four-stage learning cycleas shown in Figure 1.

The Kolb model of action learning is essentially the main theoreticalframework around which these self-management distance learningmaterials were constructed together with Schon's ideas about thedevelopment of the 'reflective practitioner'.

Design and Implementation

The seven participating schools have worked together for some years forTVEI purposes and collaborated to produce courses aimed at improvingthe skills of middle management with pastoral responsibilities. Whilst theevaluation of these courses (which were twilight sessions involving about23 hours attendance) was positive, there was a desire to provide somesort of accreditation for students. A local steering group of INSETcoordinators, the local professional education centre manager and theINSET adviser for Dyfed searched for ways to satisfy these needs.

As a result of staff development reviews undertaken in the sevenschools, a need was identified to provide a more general middlemanagement training. It was eventually decided by the steering group toadopt a course entitled 'Self-development for effective management' usingdistance learning materials developed at the National DevelopmentCentre (NDC), Bristol. The course aims, as communicated to potentialstudents by the staff development committee in the area of Dyfed wherethe schools were situated, were:• to acquaint course members with current thinking in effective

management;• to examine and improve their performance as managers;• to relate their work to educational reform currently underway;• to improve the management skills of potential middle managers.These materials offered a balance of management education, training andsupport to enable students to enhance their own attitudes towards,understanding of and skills in self-management.

The course consisted of two units entitled 'Self-development foreffective management' and 'Team development in effective schools'. Thefirst unit concentrated on the individual's management of time, preferredmanagement style and analysis of their own job. The second unit focusedon the issues concerned with team performance and review, teambuilding and management of meetings. The materials themselves consistof unit text, activity sheets guiding unit activities, readings and readingsheets supporting readings.

It was eventually agreed that the Department of Education,University College, Swansea would act as the accrediting institution. Acourse tutor (the co-author of this article), an experienced deputyheadteacher with postgraduate qualifications in management, was

111

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

C. K. TURNER & J. BROUGHTON

appointed as an associate tutor by the university. His main tasks were toconvene regular tutorials with the students, act as the initial marker ofthe assignments and deal with the administration and organisation of thecourse. A lecturer at the Department of Education (the other co-author)was nominated to moderate the marking of these assignments.

There are a number of general characteristics of effective in-servicetraining courses which have been identified by recent research. Thesecharacteristics have been summarised by Bolam (1988) in the left-handcolumn of Table I. The right-hand column shows how thesecharacteristics were implemented in the actual organisation of thisparticular type of school-based in-service training.

Characteristics Implementation of procedures

Collaborative planningincluding course leadersand the LEA

Dyfed involved with staff at UniversityCollege, Swansea, with planning; LEAprovides financial support

Clear focus on Aims clearly expressed in terms ofparticipants' current and improving self-management skills usingfuture needs action research

Careful preparatorybriefing

Structured programmewhich is flexible

Programme based onexperience, practice,action

Sandwich timetableincluding course-basedand job-basedexperiences

De-briefing after thecourse and sustainedsupport

Frequent meetings took place betweencourse participants, course tutor and LEArepresentatives

Distance learning materials were flexibleenough to allow each school to arrange itsown programme

The activities encouraged observation ofand reflection on a variety of managementskills

Students were asked to focus on issuessuch as time management, teamwork,effectiveness of departmental meetings

Regular meetings with course tutor andin-school discussions with INSETcoordinator

Table I. The relationship between good training practice and itsimplementation in this particular in-service training course.

A working conceptual model has been developed from an original idea byOldroyd (1992) to show the structural framework of the in-servicetraining (Figure 2). It is important to realise that the two-way interactionsbetween different participants on the left-hand side of Figure 2 are aspeculative attempt to indicate how strong they are; i.e. the shorter theline, the stronger the interaction. Further work remains to be done to

112

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

COLLABORATIVE INSET

investigate the student's attitude to these interactions. Table II aims toclarify the tasks associated with each role included in Figure 2.

Role Tasks

INSET coordinator To organise regular meetings of the supportgroup for students in school

Associate tutor To convene regular tutorials, using suitablegroup activities, e.g. a staff selectionexercise; discuss assignment proposals withindividual students and mark assignments

Lecturer (Department To act as course moderatorof Education)

LEA adviser To ensure the effective delivery of in-servicetraining for LEA staff

Table II. Description of tasks associated with each role.

ALL OTHER STUDENTSFROM DIFFERENTSCHOOLS DOINGTHE COURSE

IOTHERSTUDENTSIN SAME SCHOOL

I.INSETCOORDINATOR

+-+•

LEAADVISER

LEA-BASEDASSOCIATE TUTOR

STUDENT:SCHOOL-BASEDMANAGEMENTDEVELOPMENT

UNIVERSITYLECTURER:MODERATOR

DISTANCELEARNINGMATERIALS

SOUNDTHEORETICALBASISRESULTS OFRECENTRESEARCH

ACTIONLEARNING

OTHERLITERATURE

Key:denotes two-way interaction between peopledenotes X informs Y

Figure 2. A conceptual map of the structural framework of the course.

Evaluation

A preliminary formative evaluation of the Dyfed/U.C. Swanseaself-management course took place towards the end of the first moduleafter one and a half term's work. Students attending a regular briefingsession with their course tutor were asked to complete a questionnaireand a similar questionnaire was distributed to the INSET coordinatorsfrom each of the participating schools. The aims of this preliminaryevaluation were to:

113

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

C. K. TURNER & J. BROUGHTON

(a) distinguish between what the students anticipated they mightgain from the course and what they had actually gained;

(b) discover their attitudes towards the self-help group meetingsheld in school and organised by their INSET coordinator;

(c) discover their attitudes towards the monthly meetings with theircourse tutor;

(d) find out what improvements they could suggest for improvingthe course.

The students and the INSET coordinators were both asked verysimilar questions particularly in the areas related to in (a), (b) and (d).This enabled their different perceptions to be compared and contrasted.

In view of the fact that the course was incomplete, no attempt wasmade to evaluate whether the course aims had been met. Fourteen of thefifteen registered students in six of the seven participating schoolscompleted their questionnaire and six of the seven INSET coordinatorssimilarly completed their questionnaire.

Table III shows the distribution of responsibilities held by the 14participating teachers who completed the questionnaire. 64% of thestudents were on the SNS scale, 29% were heads of department (HOD)and 7% were heads of faculty (HOF). The wide variety of the teachers'experience and responsibilities provides a context which must be bornein mind when analysing the students' comments in their courseevaluations discussed in the next section.

School

A

B

C

D

E

F

Totals

Description of school

Comprehensive mixed

Comprehensive mixed

Comprehensive mixed

Comprehensive mixed

Comprehensive mixed

Comprehensive mixed

No. ofSNS

3

1

2

0

2

1

9

No. ofHOD

0

1

0

3

0

0

4

No. ofHOF

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

Total

3

2

3

3

2

1

14

Table III. Distribution of levels of professional responsibilities of course students.

ResultsStudents were asked to identify three anticipated outcomes of the course.The four most popular are shown in Table IV. INSET coordinators werealso asked to anticipate the outcomes for their colleagues and the resultsare shown in Table V. A comparison of the two sets of responses shows amarked difference in perspective with the students (the majority ofwhom are SNS teachers) clearly being motivated by the prospect ofpossible career development/promotion whereas the INSET coordinators

114

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

COLLABORATIVE INSET

(mostly deputy heads) focused more on the acquisition of managementskills and understanding of management processes. Other notablestudent responses included "improve confidence in decision-making" and"be better prepared for interview".

Response

Promotion/career development

Be able to evaluate and understandmanagement skills and processes more clearly

Lead to better qualifications

Self/personal development

Table IV. Students' anticipated gains at the start

Response

Evaluate/understand better management skillsand processes better

Self/personal development

Interaction with other members of staff

Better qualifications

No. of responses

11

8

5

4

of the course.

No. of responses

6

3

2

1

Table V. INSET coordinators' anticipated gains for their colleaguesat the start of the course.

In response to a question asking the students to identify gains made as aresult of doing the course, there was a clear shift in attitudes. Factorssuch as career development and better qualifications, which would belikely to remain as long-term outcomes, have now been displaced bymore specific outcomes as a result of doing the course and Table VIshows the four most popular replies.

Response No. of responses

Improved management skills, e.g. in time 12management and analysis of performanceImproved organisational skills 5Teamwork; more interaction with other staff 4

Better understanding of the job 3

Table VI. Students' actual gain from the course.

115

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

C. K. TURNER & J. BROUGHTON

Response

Understand the roles and difficulties of amiddle manager

Better analysis of their own and others 'performance as a manager

More self-confidence

No. of responses

2

2

2

Table VII. Students' gain as perceived by the INSET coordinators.Improved management and organisational skills were particularlyhighlighted by the students and the overall response matches quiteclosely the outcomes anticipated by the INSET coordinators in Table III.Table VII shows the gains made by the students from the INSETcoordinators' viewpoint, largely confirming what the students realisedthemselves.

The next four questions focused on the regular meetings held ineach school which were arranged by the INSET coordinator. Thesemeetings were envisaged as self-help group discussions. The results aresummarised in Table VIII. The INSET coordinators were unanimous instating that the meetings in school were of sufficient length and weresuccessful. There was no common pattern across all the participatingschools. In schools A, B, C, F and G, the students met as a group withtheir INSET coordinator on a regular basis. In school D, the students mettogether once a week to discuss their progress and only met once everytwo months with the INSET coordinator. In school E, it was not possiblefor the students to meet as a group, so they met with the INSETcoordinator on an individual basis.

School Frequency of Duration of Was the How longmeeting meeting in meeting long should the

school enough? meeting be?

AB

C

D

E

F

Once/2 monthsOnce/2 months

Once/month

Once/week

Once/2 months

Once/2 months

45 minutes30-60 minutes

40-60 minutes

30-45 minutes

30-60 minutes

30 minutes

NoYes

Yes

No

Yes

No

60 minutes-

-

60 minutes

-

45 minutes

Table VIII. Self-support in-school meetings.

Overall, the desirable length of time for meeting in school appeared to be45-60 minutes, although this would not easily be achieved if a lunchtimeslot was used. In general, the meetings in school were judged by thestudents to be successful or very successful, particularly in schools A, B,C and E, although there was little consensus as to particular factors

116

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

COLLABORATIVE INSET

which contributed to the success. Among the factors stated by thestudents were:

Good discussion arising from a lack of formal structure imposedby the INSET coordinator;Good support from senior staff;Gave an opportunity to establish the Action Research cycle;Easy to organise;Enabled me to decide the topic for my first assignment and decidethe format of the questionnaire.

In schools D and F, the main concern was lack of time. One student inschool D commented that "meetings in school were a general self-supportsession and not particularly useful as regards course content".

The next section of the student's questionnaire focused on theregular monthly meetings with the course tutor, held after school hoursin a local teachers' centre. These meetings were judged to be mosthelpful by nearly all the students who cited a number of factors whichcontributed to their success. Most notably, the following are worthy ofmention:

The good organisation and preparation of the course tutor;The nature of the meetings which were participative, informativeand not didactic;The meeting occupied a suitable length of time;The opportunity to meet with other students doing the samecourse, sharing a common goal and being able to exchange ideas.The students were asked to outline what improvements they would

make to the course and Table IX shows the three most popularresponses. In view of the novel features of this course, it was hardlysurprising that the feature most in need of improvement was the lack ofresource material which supported the course. The course handbookincluded a limited amount of reading material but in view of therequirements of an MEd standard assignment, a much wider range ofresources needed to be available to students. Students in schools A, Dand E felt that they would have liked more time with the INSETcoordinator in school although in schools D and E, it did not provepossible to organise more frequent meetings as indicated earlier.

Response No. ofresponses

Lack of resource material; unavailability of literature 7

More time in school with INSET coordinator 4

A more rigid structure with set tasks by given 3completion datesTable IX. Students' ideas for improving the course.

117

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

C. K. TURNER & J. BROUGHTTON

The third most popular response originated from students who allworked in school D. They considered that they would like to have workedwithin a more rigid structure with set tasks and given completion dates. Itis interesting to note that one student considered that "some of thematerial needed to be redesigned for the benefit of SNS teachers".

The INSET coordinators produced a wide range of different ideas toimprove the course. Five examples are included:

More emphasis on coursework, less on assignments;Mock interviews for management positions;Clearer guidelines as to the target group since the materialappeals to a wide group;Too long a gap between starting the course and the first writtenassignment which can act as a demotivator;Need more time to plan, discuss, formulate and evaluate.

Whilst it may be difficult to act on all the ideas supplied by INSETcoordinators, it will be possible to incorporate some of their suggestionsfor the next cohort of students. Prospective students will be morecarefully targeted and they will be selected on the grounds that theyalready have some management responsibility. The duration of thecourse has been curtailed to two terms which will enable students toproduce an assignment in a shorter time period.

Conclusions

The successful collaboration between a group of schools, an LEA and aHE institution has provided an effective framework for school-basedin-service training. In addition, 14 of the 15 students achieved a passgrade on the first assignment.

What factors have led to this success? Some possibilities mightinclude:• A training need for prospective middle managers was identified from

annual staff development reviews held in seven collaborating schoolsin the same locality.

• Recently designed flexible course materials about managingself-development were used.

• Students were invited to engage in action research on problems whichconfronted them in their daily work, which the students themselvesidentified.

• A sensible support structure was set up whereby a group of studentsfrom the same school met together frequently and all the studentsreceived regular tutorial support.

• A desire existed on the part of the LEA to formally accredit in-servicetraining as part of a higher degree programme.

• The Department of Education, University College, Swansea was able tovalidate the course to allow it to become part of the MEd programme.

118

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

COLLABORATIVE INSET

• The LEA was able to provide financial support to students and fund theuse of a local teachers' centre for tutorial sessions.

It is evident from this preliminary formative evaluation that the studentswere more than happy with the structure and delivery of the course, aview shared by the INSET coordinators. The students would prefer moretime to be set aside in school to meet together and more resources to beavailable. Some questions were raised regarding the level of supportoffered by INSET coordinators in school. Perhaps the main problemregarding this support was caused by the shift in approach necessitatedby adoption of the course material. The course structure requiredstudents to work within their schools using an action researchmethodology and the INSET coordinators had not anticipated this whenthe course was originally suggested. However, it was possible to providethem with one day's INSET immediately prior to the commencement ofthe course. This was led by one of the authors of the materials who wasable to clarify the support role of the INSET coordinator. Nevertheless,this role was an imposition on their workloads. This area of courseorganisation requires some attention. INSET coordinators need moredetailed training in regard to their support (almost mentoring) role in theuse of the course material and discussing with students other aspects ofthe course, such as assignments. Whether the course will have along-term effect on teachers' beliefs and attitudes as well as improvetheir management performance can only be considered in the light offurther work which might monitor and evaluate the outcomes of this sortof school-based action research in the light of the original course aims.What this exercise has highlighted is the convergence of purpose whichboth students reflect in their responses to questions about gains from thecourse, in Table VI and the INSET coordinators anticipated in Table V.

Further work is also needed to discover which group of teachers(i.e. SNS, heads of department or heads of faculty) actually gain mostbenefit from using the course materials.

Correspondence

Mr C. K. Turner, University College, Hendrefoilan, Swansea SA2 7NB,United Kingdom.

References

Bolam, R. (1988) What is effective Inset?, in National Foundation for EducationalResearch (1988) Professional Development and INSET; proceedings of the 1987NFER Members' Conference, pp. 38-52. Slough: NFER.

Hall, V. & Oldroyd, D. (1991) Management Self Development: secondary. Bristol:NDC.

Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1980) Improving in-service training: the messages ofresearch, Educational Leadership, February, pp. 379-385.

Kolb, D. (1984) Experiential Learning. London: Prentice Hall.

119

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014

C. K. TURNER & J. BROUGHTON

Oldroyd, D. (1992) Briefing notes for INSET co-ordinators (unpublished).Rackham, N. & Morgan, T. (1977) Behaviour Analysis in Training. Maidenhead:

McGraw-Hill.Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Schon, D. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. London: Jossey-Bass.Wallace, M. (1991) School-centred Management Training. London: Chapman Paul.

120

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Cas

e W

este

rn R

eser

ve U

nive

rsity

] at

10:

51 0

6 N

ovem

ber

2014