14 Mechanisms, 4 Groups: What Your September Twilight Triggers

14. 14 what? 14 things that professional development has to do to your staff if it is going to actually change what happens in a classroom. Okay, so 14 things. Yeah, and to be clear right at the start, these are not 14 topics. They are 14 mechanisms. Right. They are named, they are grouped, and they are sitting right there in a guidance report that has been public since October 2021. OK. And I mean, how many of those exact mechanisms does a standard September twilight session achieve? Well, that's the episode.

This is the education commute. So this is our second run through a national leadership qualification, taking it a cycle at a time. Yeah. And we are doing this by reading the public evidence underneath it rather than the course itself. This time, the focus is entirely on professional development. Right. And as we unpack this, I want to be really transparent about where I am sitting. OK, go on. I'm in the chair of the person who signs off the professional development budget. Ah, I see. So if you're listening to this on your way in.

And you hold the purse strings. You know this feeling. I will admit right up front that I have historically bought speakers. That has been my solution. Right. And I'm coming at this from the exact opposite perspective. Okay. I'm the person that the twilight session actually lands on. Half past three, the school hall, the chairs set out in rows. Yeah, we all know that set up. I'm sitting there and something is going to be delivered at me. So let's do this as an autopsy. We have three documents to get through today.

Three documents. OK. There was a report. It made a promise. It landed on a number. And something survived. Well, if we're going to dismantle this properly, we need to start with what we all believed before this report came out. Right. Because the longstanding belief is that professional development is simply a quantity. Right. Like just hours on a clock. Exactly. You buy time. You buy a good speaker, you put those two things together in a room, and you assume that improvement just naturally comes out the other side.

Yeah. Which is exactly why the two questions leaders are actually asked about professional development are always, how many inset days do we have and who's coming in to speak? I would definitely add a third question from my chair in the hall. What's that? Do we have to stay until five? Exactly. And to answer what a twilight actually achieves, the report I want to autopsy first. Is the Education Endowment Foundation's Guidance Report on Effective Professional Development. Okay. This was published in October 2021. Right. So what makes this document so different from what came before it?

It's what it deliberately decided to look at. It did not look at what professional development looks like. Meaning? It completely ignores the format, the length. The venue and that endless coaching versus training argument. Oh. Yeah. Instead, it looks entirely at what the professional development has to do to a person. Okay. Meaning what in practice? What does that actually look like for the leader planning the session? Well, it changes the entire focus. Its first recommendation is just a single sentence, and I will quote it exactly. Go ahead.

When designing and selecting professional development, focus on the mechanisms. Let's pause on that word, mechanisms. Yeah. Which is a strange thing for a guidance report to lead on because that is not advice. It is a complete change of subject. It is deliberately a change of subject because if you sit down and argue about format, you get into an argument that nobody can ever win. Right. You start arguing about coaching people versus training people or doing it in -house versus bringing an outside speaker in. Yeah, those arguments just go in circles.

But if you change the subject and argue about mechanisms, you can actually look at a plan on paper. and ask factually whether the required thing is present or not. It becomes a checklist. Go on then. You hooked me with the number 14 earlier. Let's hear the 14 mechanisms. They come in four specific groups, and the report's second recommendation names those groups. Okay. It says, to ensure that professional development effectively builds knowledge, motivates staff, develops teaching techniques, and embeds practice. Okay, let me make sure you and the listener have those.

Build knowledge, motivate staff, develop teaching techniques, embed practice. Exactly. Let's break them down slowly because these are the 14 mechanisms every leader needs to know. I'm ready. Let's hear them. The first group is build knowledge. This contains two mechanisms, managing cognitive load and revisiting prior learning. All right, managing cognitive load and revisiting prior learning. Got it. The second group is motivate staff. This one has three mechanisms, setting and agreeing on goals, presenting information from a credible source, and providing affirmation and reinforcement after progress. Setting goals, credible source, and affirmation after progress.

Okay. The third group is develop teaching techniques. Right. There are five mechanisms here. instruction, social support, modeling, monitoring and feedback, and rehearsal. Let me just repeat those. Instruction, social support, modeling, monitoring and feedback, and rehearsal. Perfect. And the final group is embed practice. This one is four mechanisms. Providing prompts and cues, prompting action planning, encouraging monitoring, and prompting context -specific repetition. Right. So those are the 14. Yeah. Now let me do the thing I always do as the person sitting in the room. What's that? I want to hold that standard September twilight session up against that exact list of mechanisms.

Please, walk us through. Well, let's look at the first group. Build knowledge. Does a twilight session do that? I mean, I would hope so. Yes, arguably. Right. Somebody stands up at the front of the hall and tells us things. They might manage cognitive load. They might revisit prior learning. So, check. Okay, fair enough. Group two. Motivate staff. Presenting information from a credible source. Maybe if the person the school bought is good. Right. But we certainly aren't setting and agreeing on goals together. And there's no affirmation and reinforcement after progress because the session just ends.

And the third group, develop teaching techniques. Absolutely not. Really? Think about the mechanisms you just read out. Instruction, maybe, but modeling, monitoring and feedback, rehearsal. Ah, I see. Nobody rehearses anything in a hall at half past three with 40 other chairs in rows. Right, yeah. And the final group, embed practice. Completely fails. Wow. There is no prompt, there is no action plan, there is no context -specific repetition. The session ends at 5 o 'clock, everyone goes home, and then suddenly it's March. And that reality right there is the report's main finding, just stated a little more politely.

Is it? Yeah. It finds that most professional development is heavily weighted to that first group, building knowledge, and incredibly thin on the last one. Embedding practice. So the twilight itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's just a quarter of a thing. A quarter of a thing. That is the sentence I would put on the wall in the leader's office. Now, because I'm the person sitting in the hall, I have to ask something. Go ahead. Is this the Education Endowment Foundation officially saying stop doing twilights entirely and just do coaching instead?

No. Because I guarantee you, if someone reads this quickly, that is exactly how it will get repeated in a staff meeting tomorrow morning. No, it's not saying that. And the report is very careful about that exact assumption. Okay, so what does it say? Its third recommendation dictates how leaders should approach this. It says, implement professional development programs with care, taking into consideration the context and needs of the school. Right. It dictates what must be present, the mechanisms. But those mechanisms are not a format. Critically, it does not tell you which format you have to buy.

Which is also, I would argue, the massive weakness of this document. Say it. What's the weakness? Well, you're giving me a list of 14 things that all absolutely have to be present. Yeah. But I'm looking at a school where the professional development budget is a couple of thousand pounds for the year, and the calendar only has six Twilight slots in it. Right. A list of 14 mechanisms in that context is just a list of 14 ways to feel bad about what you can't afford. Ouch. Where is the bit in this report that tells the leader what to stop doing to make room for all of this?

It isn't in there. And I am not going to pretend it is. Right. This guidance report tells you exactly what effective professional development contains. But it does not tell a leader what to cut. To make room for it. Yeah. And it does not price any of it. Exactly. That is a real gap. But honestly, that is the leader's problem to solve, not the evidence's problem. Well, thank you for admitting that. So if the first document leaves the leader with a massive gap about what to prioritize and what to cut, what's the second document?

Because the first document doesn't tell leaders how to afford this. We have to turn to an older, blunter document that speaks directly to leadership requirements. Okay. The Department for Education's Standard for Teachers' Professional Development, published in July 2016. Okay. The standard. It is one page, five standards. Yeah. And I want to read the opening sentence exactly as written because it sets the baseline rules. Let's hear it. It opens, high -quality professional development requires workplaces to be steeped in rigorous scholarship, with professionals continually developing and supporting each other so that pupils benefit from the best possible teaching.

Steeped in rigorous scholarship. If you're listening right now, hold on to that phrase. That is definitely not a sentence describing a standard Twilight session. And here are the five standards. I'll read them exactly as written, one by one. Okay, I'm listening. Number one. Professional development should have a focus on improving and evaluating pupil outcomes. Okay. Number two, it should be underpinned by robust evidence and expertise. Right. Number three, it should include collaboration and expert challenge. Collaboration and challenge. Number four, programs should be sustained over time.

Sustained over time. And the fifth standard, which is the one aimed squarely at me as the budget holder. professional development must be prioritized by school leadership. Let me stop you right there. Okay. I want the listener to hear the shift in language. The first four say should. Yes, they do. Should focus on outcomes. Should be underpinned by evidence. Should include collaboration. Should be sustained. Right. But the fifth one says must. It must be prioritized by school leadership. Must, not should. And it is the only one of the five standards that is aimed entirely at the leader rather than being a description of the program itself.

Hold on, though. We need to push back on this. Why? Because standard four and your 14 mechanisms are about to have a serious argument. How so? Standard 4 specifically says professional development should be sustained over time. But we just spent the first segment autopsying a document that said format and length aren't the point, mechanisms are. Ah, right. And this is exactly where our third document is genuinely useful. Oh, really? Because if you are trying to resolve this argument between time and value, this third document settles it.

What is it? It's the Department for Education's own framework for the headship qualification. Okay. This is public. It is the guidance the qualification is actually built on, and it takes the form of a list of numbered statements. Let's look at Statement 6 .4. What does it say? It says, professional development may need to be sustained over time, but what the time is used for is more important than the amount. Wait, say that again because that completely redefines the budget holder's job. What the time is used for is more important than the amount.

Okay, so both things are true. Yeah. The effort has to be sustained over time, but the amount of time is not the actual thing you are buying. Buying hours is not the same as buying mechanisms. Exactly. And there are four more statements in that section of the framework that I would want any leader to have read before they plan their year. Liam out. Statement 6 .3 says professional development should be developed using a clear theory of change where the people running it understand what the intended outcomes for teachers are and how those will affect pupils.

OK. And then it says this, quote, ideally, they should check whether teachers learn what was intended. Just let that land. Yeah. Check whether they learned what was intended. As the person in the hall, I can tell you nobody checks. Right. We get an evaluation form at the end of the hour. Right. But. Nobody checks if we actually learned it. Almost nobody checks. And if we move to statement 6 .5, it says, more effective professional development is likely to be designed to build on the existing knowledge, skills, and understanding of participants.

And there it is. What? That is the whole staff inset problem explained in one single line. How so? Because... A room of 40 people does not share a starting point. You cannot build on existing knowledge if you're treating the entire hall as if they have the exact same starting line. That's right. Now, let's look at the two statements about environment, because I think these are the ones that leaders skip when they're just trying to buy a speaker and get it done. OK, what do they say?

Statement 6 .7 states that teachers improve if they feel that they are working within a supportive professional environment where both trust and high professional standards are maintained. Both. Not just one or the other. Trust and high professional standards. Yeah. And Statement 6 .8 defines what a supportive environment actually contains. It contains the time and resource to undertake professional development and collaborate. It contains feedback that lets teachers improve and it contains support from leadership. So the environment is a condition for this to work. It isn't just a nice to have.

Exactly. If people don't trust you or if the environment isn't supportive, the twilight session doesn't land regardless of how good the speaker is. That is the exact claim in the framework. Yes. All right. We've talked about what to add. Give me the part that saves money. You want the money saving part. You said the first document didn't tell you what to cut but I know there is a solution in here somewhere. There is. Statement 6 .B. Okay. It says, to make use of well -designed frameworks and resources instead of creating new resources.

Oh, wow. And it names them exactly. Subject knowledge sources, the early career framework and its core induction program, the initial teacher training core content framework, the suite of national professional qualifications. Instead of creating new resources. Yeah. That right there is a license to stop writing your own materials from scratch. It is an instruction to stop. More or less. And the statement right next to it is the one that you sitting in the hall will really like. Which one is that? Statement 6 .C says leaders must be ensuring that time is protected for teachers to plan, test and implement new.

evidence -informed ideas. Protected. Protected. Which means that time exists on the calendar and it absolutely cannot be eaten by something else. Which gives us the honest translation of the Department for Education's rule that professional development must be prioritized by school leadership. Right. Prioritizing doesn't mean saying it matters in September when everyone is fresh. Prioritizing means protecting the slot in February when something urgent wants it. Let me pull over here and say the thing I've been building to since we... started this autopsy go for it i came into this resenting the twilight session and looking at the 14 mechanisms i still think most of those twilights are only a quarter of a thing yeah you said that earlier but the reason they fail isn't necessarily that the speaker is bad or that the topic is wrong then what is it The reason they fail is that four fifths of what actually has to happen to a person rehearsing the technique, planning the action, coming back to monitor it, doing it again in your own room, all of that happens after the speaker leaves and everyone has gone home.

Right. And nothing on the school calendar protects that time. And if I am looking at this from my chair as the budget holder, that protected time is the only bit I actually control. Yeah. I can't make a session good from the back of the hall. But I can protect what comes after it. Let's apply this exact concept to three different rooms then. Okay. We are looking purely at embedding practice, the fourth group from the mechanisms, which is the group that everyone drops. Right. Let's start with primary.

Okay. How does it look there? In a primary setting, protecting time to embed practice might be as small as taking a single technique and making sure it appears on the agenda of three consecutive phase meetings. Just on the agenda. Not as a massive discussion item, but just as a two -minute. What happened when you tried it? Yeah. That hits the mechanisms of prompting context -specific repetition and encouraging monitoring. And it literally costs six minutes of meeting time. Okay. How does that look in secondary? In secondary, it might mean that a department's follow -up to a twilight is purely rehearsal rather than just a discussion.

Rehearsal. It means two colleagues actually saying an explanation out loud to each other before either of them says it to a class. Wow. Okay. Remember. Rehearsal is one of the five mechanisms under developing teaching techniques. And it is the one thing a hall of 40 people physically cannot do. Yeah, definitely not. And in a specialist setting. In a specialist setting, the team around a pupil may include several adults who have very different training. Right. In this room, statement 6 .5, building on the existing knowledge of participants, does the most work.

What would that look like? It could look like delivering the exact same content twice. but at completely different starting points, rather than delivering it once at an average level that helps nobody. And it could look like having the action plan written by the team in the room before they're allowed to leave. So if we go back to the hall at half past three, what has actually changed? It is the exact same hall, the same chairs, and even the same speaker. Right. But this time, somebody has asked, before booking it, which of the four groups this session achieves and which it doesn't.

Okay. And whatever it doesn't do... is systematically scheduled somewhere else on the calendar before the session even happens, rather than just being hoped for afterwards. It's the same one session, just executed differently. And doing it that way is cheaper than buying the speaker. I have a test for the staff room. What is it? At break tomorrow, ask whoever is standing nearest the kettle to name the last piece of professional development that changed something they actually do in the classroom. Oh, that's good. Not a session that they enjoyed.

A session that changed something. And then ask them what happened in the fortnight afterwards. We can call that the walk -in test. Because if a governor walked in tomorrow and asked how you know your professional development has worked, could you show them anything other than an attendance register and a stack of evaluation forms? Probably not. The framework's exact phrase is a clear theory of change. And its test is whether anyone checked whether teachers learned what was intended. Right. If your honest answer as a leader is no, The fix is just one single line added to your next plan.

Which is? What will be different in whose classroom and who is looking. Let's bring this all together. We have four concrete things to take off the drive today. Point one, 14 mechanisms grouped into four categories. Right. Build knowledge, motivate staff, develop teaching techniques, and bed practice. Hold your next twilight session up against those four groups and count what is present. Okay, point two. Most professional development is strong on the first group, building knowledge, and incredibly thin on the last one. Yeah. Embedding practice is the critical piece that gets left entirely to goodwill.

Point three. Sustained over time is required, yes. But the framework reminds us that what the time is used for is more important than the amount. Right. Buying more hours is not the same thing as buying the mechanisms. Point four. Use the well -designed frameworks that already exist instead of creating new resources from scratch. Yes, definitely. And protect the time afterwards. When the Department for Education Standards says professional development must be prioritized, that means protecting the time in February, not just caring about it in September. Everything we talked about is linked in the show notes.

The guidance report, the standard, and the framework are all there and free to open. Right. And there is a printable one -pager for this episode at theeducationcommute .co .uk, perfect for parents or to leave in the staff room. And there are two free newsletters available while you're there, one designed for staff and one for parents and carers. It's the exact same. same evidence, just written specifically for the person reading it. in. See you at the gates.