Teaching outdoor and adventure activities: an investigation of a primary school physical education professional development p

Models of Professional Development.
When one is attempting to expand the 
knowledge base through professional development interventions, one must be mindful 
of how to communicate the intervention through various methods of instruction. How 
the instruction is given to the teachers involved varies in professional development 
programmes. Researchers over time have proposed a variety of models of professional 
development including partnerships, apprenticeships, technocratic, competence based, 
input/output, linear, collegiate/community of learners, train the trainers and 
interactive/interconnected approaches (Castle, Hallaway and Race, 1998; Harland and 
Kinder, 1997; Flint, Zisook & Fisher, 2011; Ling and McKenzie, 2001). Maldonado’s 
review of 5 successful programmes of professional development (2002) identified some 
effective models (a) the training model places the teacher in the role of student, (b) 
expert trainers model effective teaching for teachers (c) the observer/assessment model 
provides teachers with the opportunity to be observed and to receive feedback based on 
these observations and (d) the individually guided model puts teachers in control over 
their learning experiences. A review by the Teaching Council in Scotland (2006) stated 
that no one model of professional development was shown to be most effective and they 
also pointed out that professional development of teachers should emulate medicine and 
become workplace based and delivered by practicing members of the same profession.
Three models which informed the current study’s method of instruction were 
Cafferella’s Interactive Model of Programme Planning (Caffarella, 2002), Joyce and 
Showers’ Model of In-service Education and Training (INSET) (Joyce & Showers, 
1988) and cognitive apprenticeship (Collins, Brown & Newman, 1987; Collins, 
Hawkins & Carver, 1991). How each model was applied to the intervention design is 
explained in detail in chapter five. Much of the writing on the creation of professional 
development models calls for a three stage process (a) a needs assessment, (b) planning 
and delivery and (c) evaluation (Murphy, 2007). While Rose (1997) reported that there 
was a trend towards adoption of a contextualised approach to research and planning, 
Mills and colleagues (1995) although agreeing that context was important, pointed to 

---

60 
the fact that the context itself may define how decisions are arrived at during 
programme development.
The importance of context is one of the considerations highlighted by Cafferella 
(2002). Cafferella drew on the characteristics of other programmes (28 in total 
alongside literature on how adults change and learn and her own personal experience) 
with the key implications in her planning being that context is of vital importance. Her 
model of programme planning allows a number of components to be addressed 
simultaneously and has the flexibility to allow the components of the programme to 
adapt and change as demanded by the context and/or participants. Caffarella points out 
that her model should only be used ‘as a guide, not a blueprint for practice’ (p. 21).
Cafferella’s model is based on four assumptions; that the professional development 
programme should focus on what participants need to learn and what change this 
learning might bring about; that programme development is a complex interaction of 
priorities, tasks, people and events; the people involved may require all or only some of 
the components of the model and the programme designers need to be ethical. This 
model was a valuable resource, aligned with the literature on effective professional 
development, in creating a programme planning framework as it focuses on people, 
their learning, how their learning may bring about change in their organisation or 
practice and ultimately it allows for flexibility. As with any model of programming, 
due to the changing nature of adult learning and the contexts in which they live, work 
and learn, programmes are constantly adapting and changing, therefore the flexibility 
and guiding nature of this model allows for these changes and to ensure coherence for 
the teachers.
The INSET model advocated by Joyce and Showers (1988) although devised 
over 20 years ago is applicable in the context of this research. They suggest that in 
order for teachers to bring about change to their teaching, a combination of the 
following five pedagogical practices, are necessary: 
1.
Presentation: formal communication of information and theory 
2.
Modelling: watching demonstrations 
3.
Simulated Practice: trying out new skills in controlled conditions 
4.
Feedback: discussion and reflection on outcomes of the above 
5.
Coaching for application: support while practicing the new skill 

---

61 
The INSET model can be summarized as (a) introducing new theory or 
techniques; (b) demonstrating their application; (c) practice; (d) feedback; (e) coaching.
In brief, this may form a very basic model of the professional development whereby 
teachers receive the information, they are shown how to teach the content, teachers have 
a chance to practice the teaching themselves at a later date with researcher providing 
feedback and further coaching as necessary. However, on its own this model has some 
flaws. It violates the active learning and contextualised criteria that serve as two of the 
features for this study’s professional development programme. It is a very direct style 
and it is assumed that the introduction and demonstration is facilitated away from the 
school context and teachers have to be able to adapt the new pedagogical content 
knowledge to their own environment. The two components to be taken from Joyce and 
Showers’ model are (a) modelling, which was identified by teachers as their preferred 
method of learning, when done in their school, with their class and (b) feedback which 
will allow for discussion on teaching and learning as well as providing opportunities for 
reflection. These active learning related components will be incorporated into the 
programme framework for this study.
Both models of programme planning, align well with the theory of cognitive 
apprenticeship, therefore it will be explained here briefly in the context of programme 
planning and design. Constructivist theories of learning have provided evidence that 
learners are not passive slates on which information is written. Rather, learners actively 
construct their understanding of the world by contrasting new information with their 
current knowledge (Driscoll, 1994). Constructivist approaches to human learning have 
led to the development of a theory of cognitive apprenticeship (Collins et al., 1987; 
Collins et al., 1991). This theory holds that masters of a skill often fail to take into 
account the implicit processes involved in carrying out complex skills when teaching 
novices. To combat this tendency, cognitive apprenticeships ‘…are designed, among 
other things, to bring these tacit processes into the open, where students can observe, 
enact and practice them with the help from the teacher…’ (Collins et al., 1987, p. 4).
This approach is supported by Bandura’s (1997) theory of modelling, which presumes 
that in order for modelling to be successful, the learner must be attentive, must have 
access to and retain the information presented, must be motivated to learn and must be 
able to accurately reproduce the desired skill.
Cognitive apprenticeship can be used whenever someone who can perform the 
task to be learned, can model it in real life. Learners can then be helped to try what has 

---

62 
been modelled with coaching (LeGrand Brandt, Farmer & Buckmaster, 1993). Like 
traditional apprenticeships such as electrician and carpenter, whereby an apprentice 
learns a trade by working under a master teacher, cognitive apprenticeships allow the 
master to model behaviours in a real world context by means of cognitive modelling 
(Bandura, 1997). By listening to the master explain exactly what she is doing and 
thinking as she models the skill, the apprentice can identify relevant behaviours and 
develop a conceptual model of the component processes involved. The apprentice than 
attempts to imitate the behaviours with the master providing coaching and this 
individualised coaching provides assistance at a critical level – the skill level just 
beyond what the teacher could accomplish by him/herself. As the apprentice becomes 
more skilled the master decreases the support they provide until the apprentice is 
independently performing the skill (Johnson, 1992). During or immediately following 
the behavioural modelling the master articulates what she has done and why – this may 
be purely a description of the action or the strategies the facilitator used in carrying out 
the activity. Therefore when using cognitive apprenticeship, teachers are further 
scaffolded in their learning and their teaching should not become just a behavioural 
replica of the master. This scaffolding also allows for further feedback and discussion 
on the apprentices’ teaching which is also a process espoused by Joyce and Showers 
(1998) in their model of effective professional development programme models.