Is "CPD" actually CPD? The case for professional learning

Over the last few months I've been spending a lot of time thinking about the way in which teachers and school leaders learn. Part of this has been about considering what we mean by professional learning and also reflecting on my own experiences with CPD as a teacher and a school leader. 

So, let's start with CPD itself. The first thing to say is that I have delivered lots and lots of CPD and have also been responsible for CPD in several schools, and so if anything I say feels like a criticism of you dear reader then it is first and foremost a criticism of my own professional practice!

Let’s look at the words “Continuing”, “Professional” and “Development”; well I’m suggesting that in many, if not most cases, CPD rarely lives up to the promise of this optimistic title. It is only “continuing” in the sense that you’ll have to keep on doing this sort of thing until you stop teaching, the term “professional” is debateable as well when you have someone simply dictating to you or your just learning a functional skill, and how often do you come away thinking as a professional you have actually developed? More often I feel that CPD would be better described as random sessions, mostly (or at least often) dealing with functional tasks, and at best resulting in technical proficiency. If I think of my own experience, a 1 hour session on SIMS or on the latest literacy policy really doesn’t class as CPD in the sense that relates to the words. However even though I believe that the words “Continuing”, “Professional” and “Development” are mostly incorrectly used, I am going to use the term “CPD” to denote this type of activity, in order that I can contrast it with genuine professional learning.

Before the zealots pile in, I will remind you that after 20 odd years in teaching I feel I’m relatively well qualified to have a valid opinion on this matter, and there are times when teachers simply need to be told something, whether it is about a new policy or a new computer system, but I’m asserting that it is disingenuous to claim that this is genuine professional development, though I am going to classify these activities as “CPD”.

I therefore see “CPD” as activities that teachers undertake in response to direct school requirements, whether that is learning how to enter some numbers into a computer system, being told how they’re required to teach, or how to implement some policy or other. I will contrast this with “Professional Learning” (PL), in which I see the focus as the genuine development of a teacher’s capacity through real continuous learning. 

PL is not about isolated hour-long twilights (though these may form part of it from time to time), it is about an ongoing process that develops the capacity of teachers through a range of approaches which place the emphasis on the teacher to learn. The impact may not impact the students directly or immediately, but over time the teacher will develop, enjoy their work, become better at their job, and hopefully remain in the profession, thereby ultimately benefitting far more students. 

Professional learning can take many forms, whether it is through coaching and mentoring, undertaking action research, being a member of a community of practice, engaging in reflective practice, or shadowing more experienced colleagues (this is not meant to be an exhaustive list). It might also be undertaking a professional qualification, an NPQ or a Master’s degree. Many years ago I did an MA in Educational Leadership, in the short term there was little benefit to my students, but over months and years the learning that I had undertaken took root in my practice and, I believe, had a significant impact on the thousands of students that went through the departments or schools that I led. 

I have come up with a way of visualizing this, in terms of a levels of benefit to the organisation versus benefits to individual teachers (this is still a work in development). Maybe it would be interesting for you to place various course, twilights and so on, on this “graph”, and reflect on the level of benefit that has been enjoyed by you or by your school.

I would suggest that other that the real “continuing” element of professional learning, that PL is also transferrable and therefore truly career-developing. Knowing how to lead will help you lead in any school, but knowing how to input data on the X Academy’s spreadsheet is of zero use when you move to Y Academy!

An example from my own leadership career was that for one whole-school issue I felt it would be more valuable to buy every member of staff a book on the subject, ask them to read it and then reflect on it, before discussing the issue and working out how we could implement ideas from the book. It took much longer than delivering a PowerPoint, it cost more, but I believe that staff truly engaged with the material, actually developed as professionals, and then felt a sense of ownership in the outcomes. 

There is a place for the CPD sessions that I have described in a rather mocking fashion, but I believe that as a “profession” we should commit to genuine professional learning through which we invest in the singularly most important element of the teaching profession, the teachers.

Please note that this is a work in progress, but I felt it was worth sharing with you, if for no other reason than to provoke you to think about your own experiences of CPD and PL. I hope you find this useful.

Update on 12 June 2023: After some thought I have realised that the word "professional" is not particularly helpful moving forward. I have said that some of the "CPD" that teachers undertake is both necessary and yet is definitely not professional learning, as this is required by the employer for organisational reasons. It therefore makes sense to label this as "organisational learning" (OL) or maybe "functional learning" (I prefer the former). It is possible that undertaking OL may lead to PL; a session on a school's assessment process may cause a participant to dig deeper into assessment in a broader sense and thus it becomes PL. Maybe this is something that schools should consider and/or identify, look for examples where this can happen, be honest about the necessary OL dimension, but signpost PL extensions and opportunities.

Update on 27 August 2023: Whilst thinking about coaching I had another penny dropping moment, this time about consent and professional learning. Most school CPD is imposed, essentially it is non-consensual, you just have to do it whether you want to or not. Some things are essential, for example safeguarding training, but we've all experienced some utterly rubbish CPD imposed on us against our wills. At the other extreme is when you give your emotional and intellectual consent. You freely give your attention, you opt to engage. This is how I see professional learning, those experiences in which you are emotionally and intellectually engaged. I also think that you can move from non-consensual to consensual by the nature of the CPD and that it may excite you so that you want it to become PL. For example, you might experience a CPD session on assessment, this is a mandatory session which is non-consensual, but this fires your imagination and prompts you to learn more and direct your own development. You essentially then become a consensual participant and what started as CPD evolves into PL. So in summary, consensual engagement is a key marker of professional learning.