Supply and CPD

published:26 Jan 2010

Why don’t some supply teachers get access to good continuing professional development (CPD)? And what could be done about it? A new report from the GTC looks at some of the answers, reports freelance journalist Susan Young.

The 2009 GTC teacher survey showed that two out of five supply teachers in the sample had not taken part in any CPD in the previous year. Just one quarter reported having access to adequate professional development.

These findings are worrying. Embedding professional development throughout the profession is vital to improving teaching and learning. And, until now, no-one has known much about the perspective supply teachers have of professional development.

So the GTC wanted to understand the barriers to professional development for supply teachers, and start the discussion about possible solutions. With the help of specially-commissioned research from the Institute of Policy Studies in Education (IPSE), they are keen to promote and inform the debate.

And the work is very timely, not least because of the Government’s ‘Licence to Practise’ scheme.

So what stops more than a third of England’s supply teachers from doing any professional development?

One of the issues is the nature of supply teaching itself, which the IPSE report broke down into specific areas. There are at least two dimensions to this.

First, supply teachers are varied, and so their CPD needs are varied, as the table below shows. Some teachers might fall into more than one category.

Add on to this the distinctive nature of supply teaching, and a set of barriers presents itself.

• Another day, another school. This can make access to some of the most useful CPD difficult.
• No performance management. Without this it's hard to identify needs or organise development.
• No easy way to find out about CPD opportunities in school. 
• Practical barriers to training courses. Supply teachers usually lose pay if they attend courses, and have to fund themselves.
• Motivation. Some supply teachers can't see the point of professional development if they don't plan to progress their careers.

Understanding these practical barriers, says IPSE, may be the first step to overcoming them. The report also warns that 'likely supply teacher perceptions of and motivations for professional development will need to be addressed'.

Analysis
Supply teacher Kevin Smith, from Winchester, can identify with the issues raised in the report. ‘It’s time and money barriers mostly,’ he says. ‘If the Government said it wants to retrain supply teachers then fine, I’d be quite happy.’

Last year Kevin worked regularly in three schools, which allowed him to access more professional development. ‘Unless you are in the system and have the time, energy and motivation to go on websites, you just lose things.

‘But if you are in the same schools regularly you can pick up a lot of things naturally.

‘Last year two of the schools where I worked asked me to attend Inset days and staff meetings,’ he says, adding that he would have relished the same opportunity in the third school.'

What sort of professional development do supply teachers need?
Both IPSE and the GTC say that it varies. Newly qualified teachers will need support through induction. Teachers nearing retirement might require updating on professional practices, policies and initiatives.

Curriculum developments, teaching and learning could be top of the agenda for returners, whilst overseas-trained teachers may need ICT and behaviour for learning.

But professional development isn’t just about going on a course. Nadia Majeed, GTC research and evidence analyst, says:

‘Although individual courses can be useful, they are not the only or the most beneficial form of professional learning. Other learning is often more effective – like mentoring, coaching, peer observation, collaborative working, and involvement in research.’

Performance management is one way to help make professional development effective, she says, but supply teachers are not entitled to this, and so there is no structured way for them to identify their CPD needs.

How can the problems be overcome?
The report suggests several solutions for discussion, most of which would require joint working by supply agencies, schools and local authorities and possibly some kind of overall framework. These include:

• advertising development opportunities and making them available to a wider range of teachers
• mentoring for supply teachers. This could work in schools which regularly use the same supply staff. The scheme could include lesson observations for and by supply teachers
• base schools for supply teachers. On offer might be performance management and mentoring, collaborative learning and lesson observation
  training schools could help supply teachers to access professional development
• performance management
• updating online resources, using Teachers TV, and the grids for learning; and
• a record of professional development for all teachers.

The key may be in finding the motivation for schools, supply agencies and the teachers themselves to improve the situation. Funding and communicating change are important too.

The report asks where responsibility for professional development for supply teachers lies, and what the motivation would be to take it on.

‘Schools are not currently charged with offering CPD to supply teachers: what would move them to do so?’ asks Nadia. ‘Agencies are business enterprises: their overall motivation is attracting and retaining teachers. What could motivate them to support CPD for their supply teachers?’

Kevin Smith likes some of the report's suggestions. ‘The base school is a good idea. I’d use one of two schools within walking distance if I wanted to keep my professional development going. I could go when I got home, or after having my tea.’ He would also be keen to upgrade his skills in his agency, recalling a course he did on the literacy and numeracy strategies shortly after they began.