Theory of Change for Teaching and Learning
As regular readers of this blog know, my love for Theory of Change runs deep... and now I'm starting to see applications of it everywhere.
In the next few posts, I'd like to explore how a Theory of Change approach might be used for various aspects of school development, starting with the big one: Teaching and Learning.
Theory of Change for Teaching & Learning
There has been some great work around the evidence base for Teaching and Learning since I started teaching. In my own practice, I have benefited greatly from the work of Lemov, Wiliam, Willingham and many more. The gap between theory and practice has reduced, with new teachers increasingly evidence-based in their approach. The most recent attempt to make evidence accesible to teachers comes from Evidence Based Education (EBE): https://evidencebased.education/a-model-for-great-teaching/
We will be using this model in my school, and I think it is an excellent distillation of the craft of teaching. So what can Theory of Change bring to the party?
For me, what ToC can do is map out a strategic and evaluative plan to bring this kind of model to life. It is not enough knowing we need to do all of the things in the document; we need to plan for it to happen. If we don't, it remains a nice poster on the staffroom noticeboard.
Let's look at how a ToC approach might work here.
The headings within the model read like Outcomes - albeit with a detailed breakdown of each.
Outcomes of a Great Teaching Programme
Great teachers:
1. Understand the Context
2. Create a supportive environment
3. Maximise opportunities to learn
4. Activate hard thinking
What seems to be missing are levels 'above' and 'below' this to push the model through to implementation and evaluation on the ground.
In true ToC challenge, let's start at the end, with the Long Term Objective - we can get to this with some Socratic 'whys?':
- Why do we want Great Teaching?
To optimise student learning
- Why do we want to optimise student learning? So they can achieve their potential in every subject.
- Why do we want students to achieve their potential in every subject?
So that they can live fulfilling lives and contribute to society.
So, perhaps a long term goal is:
"To ensure all students go on to live fulfilling lives, contributing positively to society"
This is our Big Hairy Audacious Goal [BHAG], that should motivate and inspire us to push through the Teaching and Learning we'd like to see in every classroom. In Theory of Change, this lies above an 'accountability ceiling': an acceptance that Teaching and Learning is not the only factor impinging on the long term successful attainment of the objective. However, it is one of the big pieces of the jigsaw that teachers are responsible for in the lives of young people.
The Internal Goal
Under the BHAG, we might want an internal goal related to Teaching and Learning specifically, and not say Extra Curricular or Pastoral development. Let's say,
"All Teaching is excellent, optimising Learning for all students".
Remember that this is an ambition to strive towards and should always be slightly out of reach, especially in the case of T&L. As Dylan Wiliam famously says,
"If...we accept that every teacher needs to improve, not because they are not good enough, but because they can be even better, professional development becomes welcome - it is just the way we become better."
Now, our first causal link is in place, i.e. if all Teaching is excellent, optimising Learning for all students then students will be more likely to live fulfilling lives contributing to society. So far, so uncontroversial.
The beauty of the evidence base provided in the EBE model (below) is that the research has been done for us: we know each of the 4 Outcomes affects our internal goal of Great Teaching.
In ToC-speak, our underlying assumptions are robust and the links are plausible. So the next layer can be added:
[click to enlarge]
Activities (+KPIs)
Here, I'm thinking as a Senior Leader: what are the Activities needed to ensure the Outcomes are achieved? This is not the description of the
Outcomes, but rather the specific ways we will ensure that the 4 Outcomes become embedded in classroom practice. Exploring this question would be a productive use of SLT time in any school: mapping out what happens already and where extra Activities are needed. For example, in my setting much of Outcome 1 would be achieved in Department meetings and time allocated to Department time on Staff Days and twilights. This is the best forum for granular, subject-specific discussions around curriculum, common mis-conceptions and sharing good practice around delivery of particularly thorny topics. The EBE model gives a useful framework for middle leaders to have these discussions.
[click to enlarge]
Resource Need
To continue on the theme above, the good news around much of this work is that the only resource needed is time - and even then, most of this time exists already, but is not always directed optimally towards hose areas underpinned by robust research. For example, on Staff Days and during Twilights, does your school allocate time for departmental discussions? Within departments, is Sharing Good Practice a standing item at the start of every meeting (signifying it's relative importance over admin)?
Of course, if you feel there is a lack of expertise of management/leadership-resource to drive this forward, there may be a staffing need at Leadership level. However, most schools have T & L leadership resource in place.
To conclude, Theory of Change can provide a framework to move from good intentions to a strategic plan. An important part of this process is discussion within school teams at all levels. Once the first iteration is complete, the ToC should become a living document, regularly updated and interrogated - and here, we have good question prompts from the literature to help us. We should discuss: Is this Theory of Change for Teaching and Learning ...
1. Plausible - are the assumptions of casual links rigorous?
2. Feasible - is this doable with the resource allocated?
3. Testable - how will we know we're successful?
The work of fantastic organisations like Evidence Based Education ensures Question 1 (plausibility) is up to date - this is not the work of schools, who have enough to be getting on with. Question 2 (feasibility) is a useful discussion for SLT and Governors in Staffing and Strategy reviews. And finally, regarding Question 3 (testability) there needs to be a mechanism for judging success. Ultimately, this will be seen in student outcomes, and as they make the leap into fulfilling lives having reached their potential... or at least that is the idea in Theory.
As ever, all comments welcome.
[Quick diagrams thanks to http://theorymaker.info/ ]
Comments
Post a Comment