Five Key Models of Staff Development for Effective Teaching

Staff development is a cornerstone of any school’s ability to deliver quality education. Without structured opportunities for teachers to grow professionally, teaching practices can become stagnant, and student outcomes may suffer. In 1989, Dennis Sparks and Susan Loucks-Horsley introduced a framework of five staff development models that remains one of the most widely referenced classifications in education. Each model takes a distinct approach-some put the teacher in charge of their own learning, while others rely on structured training or collaborative problem-solving. Understanding these five models helps school leaders and educators select the right strategy for different professional growth goals.

The individually guided model 🔗

The individually guided model places the teacher at the centre of their own professional development. Rather than following a one-size-fits-all programme, teachers identify their own learning needs, set personal goals, and choose the activities that will help them achieve those goals. This could mean reading professional journals, enrolling in online courses, attending specific workshops, pursuing further qualifications, or even shadowing a colleague whose skills they want to develop.

Key assumptions behind the model 🔗

This model rests on a few important beliefs. First, it assumes that teachers are capable of self-directed learning and can accurately assess their own areas for improvement. Second, it recognises that adults are most motivated when they have a say in what they learn. According to a research overview by Education Northwest, programmes with individualised activities were consistently more likely to achieve their goals compared to those offering identical experiences to all participants.

A practical example: a teacher who struggles with integrating technology into lessons might set a goal to complete an online certification in educational technology, then practise new tools in their classroom over several months. Another teacher, confident with technology but wanting to improve formative assessment skills, might join a reading group or attend a conference session on that specific topic.

Strengths and limitations 🔗

The biggest strength is personalisation. Teachers develop skills directly relevant to their own classroom challenges, which increases the likelihood that they will actually apply what they learn. It also creates a sense of professional ownership and empowerment. However, there is a risk of isolation-teachers working alone may duplicate existing knowledge rather than benefitting from a colleague’s expertise. School leaders can address this by pairing the individually guided model with periodic check-ins, mentoring, or collaborative sharing sessions.

The observation/assessment model 🔗

The observation/assessment model is built on a straightforward idea: teachers improve when they receive objective feedback about their classroom performance. In this approach, a colleague, mentor, or instructional coach observes a teacher’s lesson and then provides structured feedback on what they saw. The process may also work in reverse, with the teacher being observed gaining insights and the observer learning by watching a peer in action.

How it works in practice 🔗

The typical cycle involves three stages: a pre-observation conference where the teacher and observer agree on what to focus on, the observation itself during which the observer collects data on specific teaching behaviours, and a post-observation conference where both parties discuss the findings. According to the Training & Technical Assistance Center at William & Mary, this model allows both the observer and the person being observed to benefit from the exercise and the subsequent analysis of strengths and areas for growth.

A critical point is that observation for development must be kept separate from formal teacher evaluation. When observation is linked to job performance ratings, teachers become defensive and focus on “performing” for the evaluator rather than taking genuine risks to improve. The Global Partnership for Education highlights how tools as simple as a spreadsheet graph can give a teacher an immediate visual picture of classroom patterns they would never notice on their own.

Peer observation and open classrooms 🔗

A popular variation is peer observation, where teachers of similar experience levels observe each other. Research from the UCLA Teaching & Learning Center shows that formative, reciprocal observation-where both partners take turns observing and being observed-is particularly effective in helping teachers develop reflective practices and shift toward more student-centred instruction. Open classrooms, where a teacher invites colleagues to watch a lesson and then holds a group feedback session, are another variation that builds a collaborative culture.

The development/improvement process model 🔗

This model takes a collective, school-wide approach. Instead of focusing on individual teacher growth, it engages groups of teachers in solving a shared problem-improving a curriculum, redesigning an assessment system, addressing low student engagement, or working on a broader school improvement plan. The premise is that when teachers are actively involved in developing solutions to real challenges, they acquire new skills, knowledge, and attitudes naturally through the process itself.

What does involvement look like? 🔗

Teachers may be asked to serve on a curriculum development committee, participate in an action research project, or collaborate on redesigning a particular programme. For instance, a group of middle school science teachers might come together to investigate why student performance on practical exams has dropped. They review student data, examine their lesson plans, research best practices in science pedagogy, and collaboratively design new teaching strategies. Through this process, they learn new curriculum design skills, data analysis techniques, and collaborative problem-solving methods-none of which were delivered through a formal workshop.

Why this model is powerful 🔗

The development/improvement process model taps into intrinsic motivation. Teachers are not passively receiving information; they are actively creating solutions. A Learning Policy Institute research brief found that effective professional development creates space for teachers to collaborate in job-embedded contexts, and that by working collaboratively, teachers can positively shift the culture and instruction of their entire grade level, department, or school. The real-world applicability of the learning is also high because the skills are developed in the context of an actual school challenge, not a hypothetical scenario in a training room.

The training model 🔗

The training model is the most traditional and widely recognised form of staff development. It typically involves an expert presenter or facilitator who delivers content through workshops, seminars, conferences, or structured courses. The trainer selects the objectives, plans the learning activities, and guides participants toward specific outcomes-usually awareness of a new concept, knowledge building, or skill development.

What makes training effective 🔗

Not all training programmes produce lasting results. Research consistently shows that one-off workshops with no follow-up have minimal impact on actual classroom practice. The most effective training programmes, according to the research compiled by Education Northwest, include exploration of theory, demonstrations of the practice, supervised trial of new skills with feedback, and coaching in the workplace afterward. In other words, training works best when it is sustained and supported, not delivered as a single event.

For example, a district introducing a new literacy framework might begin with a two-day workshop, followed by monthly follow-up sessions where teachers share their implementation experiences, observe each other using the new approach, and receive coaching from an instructional specialist. This layered approach dramatically increases the likelihood that teachers will actually change their classroom behaviour.

When to use the training model 🔗

The training model is most appropriate when there is a specific, clearly defined skill or strategy that teachers need to learn-such as a new classroom management technique, a particular assessment tool, or a technology platform. It is less suitable for complex, contextual challenges that require individual or collaborative problem-solving. According to a report from the T/TAC at William & Mary, training with follow-up activities shows the highest effectiveness when the desired outcome involves mastering a specific teaching skill or implementing a defined set of instructional strategies.

The inquiry model 🔗

The inquiry model positions the teacher as a researcher. Teachers identify a question or problem related to their own instructional practice, collect relevant data, analyse it, draw conclusions, and then make changes to their teaching based on what they find. This process mirrors formal action research and is grounded in the belief that the defining characteristic of a professional educator is the ability to take reflective action.

The inquiry cycle 🔗

A typical inquiry cycle involves several steps. The teacher begins by formulating a question-for example, “Why are my students disengaged during group work?” Next, they collect data: this could include classroom observations, student surveys, test scores, or video recordings of lessons. They then analyse the data to identify patterns and root causes. Based on their findings, the teacher implements changes-perhaps restructuring group tasks, assigning roles within groups, or changing how they introduce collaborative activities. Finally, they collect additional data to see whether the changes had the desired effect and continue refining their approach.

Individual and collaborative inquiry 🔗

Inquiry can be conducted alone, but it is often more powerful when done in small groups or professional learning communities. A group of teachers investigating the same issue can divide the research work, bring diverse perspectives, and hold each other accountable for follow-through. Study groups where colleagues read and discuss research literature together are another form of inquiry that broadens teachers’ exposure to new ideas.

While the training model remains the most commonly used approach in schools, many education researchers believe that the inquiry model will become increasingly important as the concept of the teacher-as-reflective-practitioner gains ground. The inquiry model encourages teachers to treat their classrooms as living laboratories and to use evidence-not assumptions-to guide their instructional decisions.

Choosing the right model 🔗

No single model of staff development works best in all situations. The choice depends on the goals, context, and resources available. Here is a quick guide:

Individually guided works best when teachers have different needs and the school wants to empower self-directed professional growth. Observation/assessment is ideal when teachers need specific, targeted feedback on their classroom practice. Development/improvement process suits school-wide challenges that require collaborative solutions. Training is most effective for teaching specific, replicable skills to a large group. Inquiry is the right choice when teachers need to investigate and solve complex instructional problems using data.

In practice, the best staff development programmes combine multiple models. A school might use formal training to introduce a new teaching strategy, follow it with peer observation to support implementation, and encourage teacher inquiry to assess the strategy’s impact on student learning. This blended approach addresses the diverse learning needs of teachers while creating a culture of continuous improvement.

Why these models matter today 🔗

Education systems worldwide face growing demands-closing achievement gaps, integrating technology, supporting diverse learners, and preparing students for a rapidly changing world. Teachers cannot meet these demands without effective, ongoing professional development. The Learning Policy Institute has identified that effective professional development is content-focused, incorporates active learning, supports collaboration, provides coaching and feedback, and is sustained over time. These features align closely with the five models discussed above.

When schools invest in the right mix of staff development approaches, teachers become more skilled, more reflective, and more motivated. And when teachers grow, students benefit directly through improved instruction, stronger engagement, and better outcomes.

What do you think? Which of these five models do you believe would have the greatest impact in your school setting, and why? How might combining two or more models create a more effective professional development experience for teachers?

References

1. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ414183
2. https://educationnorthwest.org/sites/default/files/StaffDevelopment.pdf
3. https://education.wm.edu/centers/ttac/documents/packets/designingprofdev.pdf
4. https://www.globalpartnership.org/blog/five-models-teacher-centered-professional-development
5. https://teaching.ucla.edu/resources/teaching-guides/classroom-observation-for-instructors/
6. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_BRIEF.pdf