ABSTRACT
In the UK, in theory at least, the most organized and highly funded method of attempting to bring about improvements and changes in classroom practice is through the in-service education and training of teachers (INSET). Although INSET manifests itself in many different forms (e.g. statutory Professional Development Days in schools, higher degree courses in institutions of higher education, school and classroombased support from LEA advisory teachers, residential weekends, professional development action-research groups and networks), the ultimate, if not always explicit, justification for most INSET activity is that it will contribute to the process of making classroom practice more effective. Given the substantial professional and political pressure for improvements in teaching and learning, in-service provision, as a key mediation vehicle, assumes the onerous responsibility of promising to facilitate such changes and developments in classroom practice. Looked at from this perspective, it is clearly vital to take up the central theme explored in this book and ask to what extent can and does INSET fulfil this promise? Under what conditions does INSET precipitate changes in classroom practice? Alternatively, why and how does INSET as a mediation process break down so that little impact on classroom practice is achieved? In this chapter, we draw on the results of a case study research project which addressed these questions, and outline a new holistic typology of INSET outcomes as a device for discussing the complex mediation between INSET and changes in classroom practice. For a more detailed exposition of the model, the research and the inservice scheme on which it was based, the reader could consult Kinder and Harland (1991) and Kinder et al. (1991).
