RETAIN UK Project Team: Karen Walshe, Lindsay Hetherington, Nigel Skinner, Nick Givens, Keith Postlethwaite, Andrew Dean

The Project The EU-funded RETAIN project is a collaborative research project involving partners from five countries (Denmark, Belgium, Turkey, Spain and the UK) who have contrasting socio-economic-political contexts and differing teacher retention issues.

Project Aim Overall aim of the RETAIN Project is to help schools to create and develop an inclusive and creative environment which will improve the retention of high quality teachers.

Project Objectives S pecific objectives of the RETAIN project are: 1. To explore issues relating to teacher retention from international perspectives across the five partner countries 2. To develop and trial a set of tools designed to help school managers and teachers to create an inclusive and creative working environment

The Problem: Teacher Retention In the UK, teacher turnover remains high in comparison with other countries. Over 10 years ( ), 12% of NQTs left after 1 year. Between 2000 and 2009, 28% left after 5 years. Only 80% of trainees who qualified in 2013/14 were employed in teaching posts within 6 months. Recent figures estimate that almost 40% of NQTs quit the profession within a year of qualifying (the exodus of new recruits has almost tripled in six years).

Retention problems affects secondary schools to a greater extent than primary schools Particular shortages in certain subject areas, notably Science and Mathematics, where recruitment is more challenging and leaving rates for existing Maths and Science teachers are above average. Teacher turnover is higher in disadvantaged urban schools (employ greater numbers of novice teachers) More early career teachers leave the profession Regional differences in teacher recruitment and retention issues exist, with greater vacancy rates in London, the East of England and the South East. According to research…..

The solution? Research suggests that teacher resilience is key. There are a wide range of professional, social, emotional and motivational factors which impact on teachers’ sense of their own resilience. These include both personal and contextual ‘risk’ and ‘protective’ factors, summarised in the table on the following slide:

Teacher Resilience Factors: Research synthesis IndividualContextual Protective Altruism/vocation, Tenacity, Intrinsic motivation, Humour, Flexibility, Risk- taking, Self-efficacy, Agency, Problem- solving, Social competence, Active coping skills, Professional ambition, Self- reflection, Commitment to professional development, Good teaching skills, Confidence in teaching ability Supportive school culture / peer support, Supportive leadership, Mentor support, Good relationships with students, Social/family support, Quality of pre-service teacher education course Risk Lack of self-confidence, Difficulty asking for help, Conflict between personal beliefs and school practices Pupil disruption, Meeting needs of disadvantaged students, Lack of leadership support, Lack of resources, Poor relationships with parents, Isolation, Poor relationships with colleagues, Scrutiny/performance management culture, Lack of power over teaching decisions, Workload, Lack of mentoring, Lack of security, Insecure subject/curriculum knowledge

Research suggests that a supportive school culture that is ‘integrated’ in supporting both experienced and novice teachers is a contributing factor for teacher retention and the development of teacher resilience. Project set out to develop and trial a set of tools (toolkit) to support school leaders and teachers in developing an inclusive, creative, and integrative school culture. We argue that this tools can be effective in mentor/SLT support for PGCE trainees.

COLLABORATIVE PROJECT WITH 25 SCHOOLS IN TOTAL The Project

Collaborative Research Project Each project partner worked with 5 schools in their country. During the course of the project, due to school drop- out, the UK project team worked with members of the senior leadership team and teachers in a total of six schools in the South West

Literature Review: Reasons for staying Vocation Professional freedom Supportive colleagues

Literature Review: Reasons for leaving Workload Seeking new challenges School situation (e.g. poor behaviour, poor management) Salary Personal circumstances Decline in public respect for the profession

In order to develop effective tools that could be used within a range of national contexts, the project began by exploring teachers’ perceptions of reasons why teachers might choose to remain in or leave the teaching profession Step 2: Preliminary teacher survey

DEVELOPED IN COLLABORATION WITH THE PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS The Toolkit

Five Themes 1. Differentiation and inclusion - inclusive management, awareness raising practices, inclusive teaching skills 2. Co-construction, co-design and collaboration – developing a professional learning community 3. Collaboration with the external world particularly parents and their expectations. 4. Stress management to cope with new demands, new technologies, tests, curriculum goals and bureaucracy. 5. Professional identity - in increasingly results oriented and change dominated schools. environment.

Tools designed to …  Be bottom-up rather than top-down development tools, requiring both a high degree of managerial engagement and a high degree of participation  Be open-ended processes rather than closed processes, and introduce changes through encouraging reflection and critical dialogue

THEMETOOLS 1 Differentiation and inclusion (Turkey) Inclusion Compass Reverse Mentoring 2 Co-construction, co-design and collaboration (UK) Framework for Collaborative Dialogue Lesson Study 3 Collaboration with the external world (Denmark) Inclusion Compass 4 Stress management (Barcelona) Role analysis Analysis of organisation’s role Vision World Cafe 5 Professional identity (Belgium) SWOT analysis ( characteristics of a good teacher) Situate oneself on a line (teacher identity) Changing / Evolving representations of the role of ‘teacher’ Edward de Bono’s six thinking hats

Co-construction, Co-design & Collaboration Strong link between collaboration and positive school outcomes; high levels of motivation; and effective implementation of change. Research suggests that there are three key issues in teacher retention that collaborative working may help to address: 1. Teacher resilience 2. Risk management 3. Innovation

Tool 1: Framework for Collaborative Dialogue Rooted in Activity Theory – supporting teachers in exploring how they can take action for change in relation to a key issue/problem. Designed to scaffold collaborative conversations

Worked Example of the Framework for Collaborative Dialogue (FCD)

Tool 2: Lesson Study Supported by the FCD Supports teacher collaboration to address a key issue or develop an innovative and creative pedagogy A group of teachers (usually 2-3) undertake to collaboratively plan a lesson which one will teach whilst the other(s) observe. Fosters shared ownership of the lesson Enables critically reflective thinking about the impact of the teaching on pupils’ learning

Flexible Schools may use both tools in a wide variety of ways, for example: Whole school approach Members of the SLT Team of teachers e.g. a department Triad of teachers e.g. SLT; Senior teacher; Novice teacher Team of teachers and support staff (which may include parents and pupils)

The Trialing Process: UK THEME(S) SELECTED by UK SCHOOLS TOOL(S) SELECTED 1 3 Co-construction, co-design and collaboration Framework for Collaborative Dialogue Lesson Study Stress Management World Café 4 Co-construction, co-design and collaboration Framework for Collaborative Dialogue Lesson study Inclusion and Differentiation Reverse mentoring 5 Co-construction, co-design and collaboration Framework for Collaborative Dialogue

What did we learn? Feedback suggests that when implemented as intended, the toolbox enabled schools to achieve what they set out to achieve, particularly in relation to: a) strengthening opportunities for collaborative work within the school b) encouraging staff to look at issues, difficulties and tensions with ‘fresh eyes’ c) providing opportunities for staff to feel ‘listened to’ d) identifying tools that would help to improve teacher retention

Tool 1: Framework for Collaborative Dialogue Helped to give a clear focus Enabled new ways of looking an issue Encouraged discussion - multiple voices rather than one dominant voice Particularly helpful when discussing issues where it is evident that staff will have quite differing opinions Gave opportunities for staff to lead the conversation rather than members of the Senior Leadership Team Resulted in a better (higher) quality of focused dialogue

However….. Important to identify a primary focus before using the framework Be clear about whether the template should be completed or just used as a prompt for discussion More support needed to help teachers to identify, access and discuss relevant research Very effective when combined with Lesson Study as a focus for discussion in the beginning to help to identify the issue/topic/strategy/resource for the lesson and as a prompt for discussion concerning the effectiveness of the Lesson study lesson

Tool 2: Lesson Study Staff responded very positively to this tool Provides concrete opportunity for staff to collaborate and to share good practice Very supportive tool which provides teachers with a safe way to experiment with new ideas and take more risks in a non judgemental environment Promotes self-evaluation and reflection Resulted in noticeable improvement in pupils’ achievements

However…. To be implemented properly needs sufficient time and resources e.g. being able to release teachers from lessons in order to observe. Hard to do in a small school with limited staff and resources.

Tool 3: World café Gave energy, focus and structure to small group discussions Ensured that all staff shared their views and were listened to Enabled all teachers to reach a conclusion about the issue under review Consequently staff had ownership of the conclusions reached and ‘bought-in’ to the proposed changes

Promoting Factors Collaborative nature of the project team (GSE project team and steering group) Some of our schools in particular, recognised that they had retention issues and were keen to address these The toolbox was most effective when it was integrated into already existing CPD goals and opportunities

Promoting Factors Strong positive trusting professional relationships between school managers and teachers. School managers with attitudes that genuinely complemented the values and approach of the project were able to make best use of its contents. School selected tools which were seen to be relevant for the context within which they work. The initial success of some of the tools trialled in round 1 was a promoting factor and fuelled schools’ willingness to engage with other tools in the toolbox

Challenges The key biggest challenge for schools was that of capacity, for example: 1. High turn-over of staff (particularly Headteachers) 2. High workloads and lack of time (and resilience) for teachers to engage with the project. 3. Danger that some teachers might see some of the tools (e.g. Lesson Study) as another management tool for monitoring them.

Challenges 5. Conditions of national accountability in England at the moment which means that schools are driven by the need to show immediate impact with regards to any intervention – what is the impact on pupils learning now? 6. Some tools were felt to be very time consuming and would therefore add to teachers’ workload and associated stress rather than reduce it

Preliminary Conclusions The toolbox assumes that the goal is to help schools to create open and inclusive working environments, which assumes that schools want to achieve this and that schools would see the benefits of this. Schools with high retention issues were the ones to drop out suggests that the tool box might be better seen as a ‘health tool’ (i.e. preventative tool) rather than an ‘emergency tool’ when the issues have already arisen.

For the toolbox to be effective teachers need to trust that they are free to take risks (e.g. with Lesson Study) and try something completely new without fear of judgement. A key thing that we’ve learnt is that it’s not the tool per se, but how its purpose is understood and how its location in the school culture is constructed e.g. lesson study could be seen as another performance monitoring tool or as a genuine CPD tool.