This document summarizes a staff meeting discussing collaboration and sharing practices. The meeting covered several topics: - Whether setting clear rules with students collaboratively could help set expectations and reduce ambiguity. - How student behavior is influenced by factors like teacher attire, use of technology, and consistency in enforcing rules. - Examples of successful and challenging student situations, and strategies for managing behavior like ignoring bad behavior. - The benefits of open communication between teachers, such as sharing anecdotes, advice, and information on professional development. - Setting up systems like email groups and WhatsApp to continue collaboration after the meeting.

1. “Is staff collaboration in sharing
practices deemed beneficial?”
By Dr Sobia H Ellahee
MA Educational Leadership and Management
University of Nottingham
1

2. Figure 1: ‘Moments’ of a cycle
2

3. Figure 2: Action-Reflection Cycle
3

4. Appendix A: Questionnaire
4

5. Appendix A: Questionnaire
5

6. Appendix A: Questionnaire
6

7. Appendix A: Questionnaire
7

8. Appendix A: Questionnaire
8

9. APPENDIX B - TRANSCRIPT
Appendix B 1
Is Staff Collaboration and Sharing Practices deemed beneficial?
General Transcript of Meeting Staff Meeting 1
NOTES:
• (Body language or non-verbal language) is in round brackets
• [Non-specific verbal cue or other action] is indicated by square brackets with italics
• Participants are referred to by initials to maintain anonymity.
Researcher: started with a monologue of the following points:
• Introduction as to why the staff meeting was called - masters research project
• Confidentiality issues advised and consent forms signed.
[forms physically signed and personal contact details of attendees collected for emailing questionnaires]
• Quick dossier about Researcher
• How passion about education developed and how people should embrace their culture and education
and use it positively.
• Reiterated that meeting is a judgement free zone, and purpose of meeting is to improve and better
ourselves as teachers to help the students.
• Purpose of meeting to gauge mindset of teachers and how they felt about have meetings.

10. • Research shows one factor affecting student outcome is staff collaboration, which improves student
outcome; their attitude, potential and results.
• Students at TLT seemed confused as to what was expected of them. This explained ambiguity in their
behaviour.
• Felt the urge to speak to someone for support.
• However, time factors prevented staff to talk and discuss.
• Not only about the students but about practices which could help each other.
• Need all staff to come from a common place to help standardise behaviour and expectations.
• ED asked if it was ok to have a meeting to share our practices and have support.
• This is hopefully the first of many meetings to come – time and frequency to be agreed.
• Research quoted and reiterated that staff collaboration improves the student experience.
• If any evidence was required, to email.
• Reflection important as an individual and as an educator and importance of personal development.
• To now discuss various topics to see what everyone thinks.
• Researcher: Ambiguity about code of conduct by staff and students – is there a need to address this?
Staff abiding by centre rules and regulations and to lead by example, for example, disparity of attire
worn by staff .
• ED: Use of phones by students, allowed by some staff when questioned.
• ED: staff use of laptops during teaching time.
• Researcher: is justifying exceptions to the generic rules.
10Appendix B 2

11. • Researcher: at the first lesson, is setting class rules agreed by both staff and student collaboratively
helps the student to know boundaries and what they can and cannot do. Opens communication up.
Kids very different today, no longer do what they are told without question.
• ED: children also have choice as to who teaches them.
• SP: Kids need to be told they have to manage with whom they are being taught by. Should respect the
teacher as they do know more than they do.
• ED: Privileged kids in this region. In the UK, state schools do not have the choice. Kids overhear parents’
reactions and how they are paying therefore they have the right and choice. Respect for the teacher
needs to come from home.
• SR: agrees and discusses about her own experiences and attitude of them paying and the teacher
serving. Mindset is different as they are the paying customer.
• Researcher: Questions how to deal with this attitude. Was surprised of this mindset considering culture
of the region demands respect for teachers.
• SR: attitude in government schools the same despite non-payment of fees. Attitude prevalent in the
region.
• Researcher: At TLT, is there a policy for behaviour which can be referred to by all, to allow the students
to know any boundaries they are crossing.
• SR: Asks if students are given anything when they first arrive?
• ED: TLT does, but this year when special needs student behaviour is focused on, they take advantage
and it has gone worse. Anecdote given.
• Researcher: expressed that this example is a good one that could be used to discuss as a group, for
advice on how to manage this situation.
Appendix B 3

12. • SP, SR and ED discuss the anecdote briefly.
• SP brings up attire as potentially distracting and influential on the attitude.
• ED suggests sending an email out to the parents as a reminder of how students should be dressed.
• Researcher: would find email beneficial so that any discrepancy in attire can be reinforced by common
teachers.
• SP: to send email now despite coming to the end of the year so that come September they have had
time to get used to it. Will help with demeanour.
• Researcher: sometimes ignoring the behaviour helps otherwise it’s a constant battle and to remind
them of “our” rules reminds them of their responsibility.
• SR: anecdote of attitude and pep talks given of how it affects the teacher as well.
• ED: Asks MR’s secret to kids loving him.
• Researcher: uses emotions to get the kids to comply – how upset I am etc.
• SR: doesn’t always work.
• ED: gives anecdote of students’ behaviour in UK. Behaviour here is less disruptive. Emotional drama
gets the kids questioning.
• SR: it can have the reverse affect and they want to push your buttons.
• ED: behavioural issues here is nothing compared to the UK.
• Researcher: still have to deal with them.
• AM: easier to control 2 students than a full classroom.
• TC: voiced agreement.
• ED: however, more intense with few children especially when they are at different levels.
Appendix B 4

13. • ED & Researcher: ask MR what he does to get the kids to comply.
• MR: States he pretty much ignores them.
• ED: students come out loving MR and TC.
• Researcher: The guys are really chilled.
• MR: the kids don’t entice a reaction from them.
• TC: students don’t like a reaction.
• SP: Boys are easier to deal with.
• ED, Researcher and SR: voiced agreement.
• ED: anecdote of student with MR as as example of MR ignoring student behaviour.
• MR: voiced agreementResearcher: Has had to do the same as there is only a certain amount of time.
• Researcher: If messages are sent to parents, would it be a good idea to Bcc the teacher so they are
aware of the situation?
• [MR nods vehemently]
• SR: gives an anecdote of an example of disruptive behaviour.
• ED: contributes to anecdote as student in common. Asks MR if he has the same issues.
• MR: not really. Only early in the morning. Generally, ok.
• Researcher: Introduced issue of sleeping and eating affecting behaviour negatively.
[General agreement by all with nodding of heads]
• Researcher: tried speaking to the parents to help e.g. packed lunch.
• AM: at a certain age do not want packed lunch.
• SR: if not given money will eat what they are given.
Appendix B 5

14. • Researcher: tried to reason with them as teenagers.
• SR: they need to be educated. Gives anecdote of how she educates them.
• Researcher: doesn’t want to be condescending to the parent.
• SR: to educate the parent.
• Researcher: addresses the group and asks if everyone is aware how food can affect behaviour.
[Group agrees verbally and with nodding]
• Researcher: asks if the teachers reinforce it to the students.
[General verbal agreement]
• MP: wishes to clarify some points (refers to notes made during meeting). Regarding attitude and
posture during the class: depends on the teachers.
• Emails sent to parents and teachers. Students come in and point out the teacher non-conformity.
• Researcher: teachers need to help to reinforce these rules.
• ED: teachers have been let go as they are not abiding by the attire rules.
• MP: email sent to parents is the same as the teachers.
• ED: some parents do not respond as there is a reason their kids are not in school was because of
certain issues and they are just content with the child being happy coming to the centre. Gives an
anecdote. TLT have to be a bit flexible and take into consideration the backgrounds.
• MP: The students reflect what the teachers are doing. Anecdote of when a teacher is not abiding the
rules and the students complain.
• ED: Gives another anecdote and how students can play up as a result of teachers adverse behaviour.
• Researcher: there is standard that needs to be agreed and conformed to amongst the teachers, so the
students don’t react. Should reinforce amongst ourselves.
Appendix B 6

15. • [MP: voiced agreement]
• Researcher: asked groups opinion.
• [SR: voiced agreement]
• MP: gives an anecdote where following up is important. Kids complain that kids do not follow up on
homework. MR and TC always follow up. States that if one child is ahead of another, to use the child as
leverage to help the other.
• SR: agrees that she also uses collaboration and gives an anecdote.
• ED, Researcher, MP, TC and MR contribute to the anecdote briefly.
• Researcher: setting up expectations so the students know where they stand.
• SP: teachers are taught not to engage.
• SR: continues with anecdote and works. With girls need to earn respect. Need to engage, have the
dialogue to establish relations.
• SP: gives anecdote of how engaging can be emotionally draining and how she was advised not to get
involved so much.
• Researcher: meetings to vent?
• ED: voiced agreement. Loved venting today.
• Researcher: Ladies have vented but men are quiet. Meetings not only to vent but to gain information.
• MR: Yeah [TC verbally agree in response]
• Researcher: reiterated question to make sure gentlemen on board and then states that the men are
nodding in agreement for benefit of audio recording.
• Researcher: Advised that future meeting could include possible topics like pedagogy, TLT rules and….
Appendix B 7

16. 16
• Researcher:….regulations, behaviour management, support and advise, personal development,
continued professional development.
• Researcher addresses ED asking if TLT has any information about courses and lectures for teachers.
• ED: yes.
• Researcher: possibility of sending information out on a group email?
• ED: yes.
• SR: on a WhatsApp group?
• Researcher: Would you all be open to a WhatsApp group? It would have some rules and regulations as
well.
[General agreement]
• SR: open up an opportunity to the students to vent as well.
• ED: have a meeting with them as well.
• SR: make them feel valued.
• Researcher: conclusion of meeting. This is the introduction of what the meetings could be. Gives
personal opinion on how beneficial meeting was. Need to be honest and open. Opened up floor with
possibility of another meeting.
[General agreement]
• ED: more focused topics.
[General agreement]
• Researcher: reiterated this meet was to generate ideas and get an idea of staff’s opinion on the whole
concept.
Appendix B 8

17. APPENDIX C: RESULTS
17

18. APPENDIX C: RESULTS
18

19. APPENDIX C: RESULTS
19

20. APPENDIX C: RESULTS
20

21. APPENDIX C: RESULTS
21