Curriculum and policy in the Scottish education system appear to be changing faster than ever. Teachers are constantly trying to respond to the requirements laid down by management, government and, occasionally - when deemed appropriate - by the learners themselves.

Recent initiatives have included the introduction of Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) benchmarks, changes to national testing at secondary level and the highly controversial and much-maligned Scottish National Standardised Assessments for primary pupils.

The priorities within education also change rapidly. Around a decade ago, there seemed to be a real focus on enterprise education, but the age of austerity has seemingly put pay to that, for now at least. Over the past year or so the subject of “adverse childhood experiences” has become one of the most talked about topics in education. The average teacher seems to be constantly spinning a wide variety of metaphorical plates including, but not limited to, the attainment gap, sustainability, social justice and inclusion.

Amid all of this, most teachers want to do the very best job possible. But, often, they seem unsure of where they should focus their main efforts, and of how best to keep their skills and knowledge up to date to cope with these changes. Many posts within Facebook groups and on other social media come from teachers asking for help teaching topics or for ideas for lessons. It seems that the plethora of initiatives and priorities means that many important issues are only being addressed superficially. Ironically, given that we are in the business of learning, it appears that teacher learning and development is being overlooked, or underprioritised.

Of course, there are opportunities for professional learning or development. The General Teaching Council for Scotland is in the process of releasing a new model for career-long professional learning, and CLPL features heavily in the professional standards for teachers. There are also opportunities provided by local authorities: traditionally, teachers would access professional development through formal means, with training provided by way of in-service days or after-school staff meetings. However, research suggests that these top-down, one-off approaches to teacher development are ineffective.

Arguably, the ultimate formalised professional learning is further study, including postgraduate or master’s-level. Back in January 2011, the highly influential report Teaching Scotland’s Future, prepared by former senior chief inspector Graham Donaldson, drew attention to the importance of teacher CPD. Donaldson stopped short of saying that teaching in Scotland should be a master’s-level profession, but proposed working towards this. Over the past eight years, to address his recommendations, there have been a range of projects, including government-funded, master’s-level modules.

From working with both student teachers and more established teachers, I have seen a growing appetite for these opportunities: there is clearly desire to develop skills and knowledge to become a better teacher.

Yet, as can be seen in Facebook groups for teachers, there is still some resistance within the wider educational community. Some teachers are comfortable in stating that development and further study just isn’t for them - and some actively discourage their peers from pursuing further study or professional learning. This is concerning: the same teachers would not accept this from their students.

In many other countries where teaching is a master’s-level profession, this may reflect national culture and expectations of education. Education systems exist where teaching is a respected and valued profession, on a par with law or medicine. However, we must be wary of “education policy tourism”, whereby a well-meaning administrator or politician sees a great initiative in another country and decides that this should be “dragged and dropped” without consideration of any of the additional factors that have contributed to its success.

In Scotland, the short-lived “chartered teacher” scheme attempted to recognise and reward highly accomplished classroom practitioners. Although this required them to self-fund master’s-level study, they would then be paid more. However, the scheme received mixed reviews from teachers and school leaders and was abandoned after a few years; similar initiatives in England met the same fate. Clearly, the teaching profession seems unsure about what form of professional development or learning it wants - if any - and the barriers and challenges raised earlier further complicate the picture.

Despite these challenges at grassroots level, some teachers are taking responsibility for their own professional development and learning. Several years before the Donaldson report was published, the TeachMeet phenomenon began in a pub in Scotland. Although TeachMeets seem to be less common now, and may have had their day, the Pedagoo movement - which also sprung up from Scotland - operates on Twitter and through face-to-face events. Recently, the TeachMeet approach has been reimagined in England under the title BrewEd, whereas EdCamps, billed as “unconferences”, are taking place in the US, based on very similar underpinning principles. These events are not validated or sanctioned by a local authority, university or organisation such as the GTCS. And this may be the appeal: these opportunities are run by teachers, for teachers.

The grassroots nature of these initiatives could raise questions over quality of content or delivery, and critics would argue that there is no quality assurance over content.

However, some of these initiatives are self-managing. TeachMeet talks are limited to three or seven minutes - in some cases, you might get something thrown at you by a facilitator if you run over this allotted time. The US EdCamps include the “rule of two feet”: if you find the content boring or not useful, you just get up and leave. For teachers, used to a captive audience, this can be quite a motivator. The content of sessions will obviously be variable but this is where the community element comes in: people who feel more connected to each other have a better opportunity to provide meaningful, genuine feedback.

Having attended events like this, one of the most striking things is the lack of a hierarchy. Grassroots professional development is democratising, the argument goes. People still declare their status, but for some reason it seems to matter less. The chance to debate educational issues, and have your point of view heard, is empowering. However, the percentages of the teaching community engaging in such grassroots activity are still relatively low. This may be down to a lack of time or access, but there could also be many other factors.

The influential educators Mark Priestley and Gert Biesta have recently written about personal motivation and agency. They propose agency as something teachers work toward and do not simply “have”.

Unfortunately, this is at odds with most of what a teacher encounters in education: plans need to be “done”, lessons “delivered” and outcomes “achieved”. Trying to incorporate something so esoteric into a set of teacher standards, or even a formal master’s-level qualification, is likely to prove challenging - so perhaps this is not the place for it.

The alternative is that this form of professional development remains disconnected from any formal management or administrative systems.

To suggest that teachers should be motivated to engage with professional development may seem fairly obvious. Yet even the most highly motivated teacher may find it a challenge to sit through a day-long Inset on, for example, the latest local authority pupil-attainment tracking system. This may be where genuine development activity differs from training. In contrast, the various informal grassroots movements and initiatives provide opportunities for teachers to opt in and out of professional development. And, crucially, these teachers have ownership to direct and lead their own development and learning - a clear departure from the traditional, transmissive approaches.

The other advantage of these informal forms of professional development is that teachers get to mix with other highly motivated, like-minded individuals: they can learn from each other and form informal, fluid professional learning networks, which can be further reinforced with recent technology and via social media.

If teachers or educators want to take ownership of professional development, then there are a few simple things they can do. The first is to talk to people about learning and teaching, and then really listen to what they say. If they make a suggestion then, before rejecting it, give it a try it - and don’t worry if something doesn’t work the first time. If something isn’t working, or you disagree on fundamental issues, try discussing this in a positive way, rather than ignoring or criticising later. The use of social media, in particular Twitter, can provide a great source of professional reading. However, consume it in a discerning manner - do not just accept everything at face value.

The final thing teachers can do is to lobby managers and leaders. If these leaders are in any way reluctant to embrace these ideas, keep working on them. Making gradual, incremental progress can be far more effective than top-down initiatives or policy change. All this takes time and commitment, however, so teachers need to believe in themselves, and each other, before the local and national culture of education will shift.

During my time as a teacher and now as a teacher-educator, occasionally, I have and I still encounter negative attitudes toward professional development and learning, regardless of whether it is formal or more informal and grassroots-driven. If educators question the value of learning, this will have a demoralising impact on colleagues who are keen to develop and learn themselves.

I know of several examples of teachers who, undertaking further study, have kept this quiet because they feel they will be judged by others in the staffroom. This problem might be cultural, and possibly an example of tall-poppy syndrome. However, the landscape for teacher development is altering, with more and more teachers challenging this notion, often from an early stage in their career. They are doing this in a positive and constructive way, sharing ideas and discussing what they are doing and why - owning their professional development. Perhaps the first rule of teacher professional development club should be to talk about teacher professional development club: this way the traditional, negative view of teacher professional development can be challenged.

Let’s be clear: formal qualifications are important, as is guidance from organisations such as the GCTS and Education Scotland. But so are the informal opportunities to learn, whether through professional networks or even ad hoc conversations. If teachers and educators are to navigate the shifting sands of education, their own learning and development must take priority - and they must be allowed ownership of the process.

Perhaps then, when the inevitable changes come, they will be better equipped to respond.

Richard Holme is a University of Dundee education lecturer and former schoolteacher whose specialisms include primary education, Stem and curriculum innovation

* This article first appeared in the Tes Scotland issue of 25 January 2019 under the headline “Want to become a better teacher? Join the club”