MoyoEd Research

Introduction: CPD becomes a ritual.

Every teacher knows the pattern: a school leader books a presenter, staff gather in the hall, and a “professional development session” begins. Coffee, slides, applause, and the next day, everyone returns to business as usual, and the box has been ticked.

Good intentions are apparent, but research from 2015 to 2025 clarifies how Continuous Professional Development (CPD) is planned and implemented matters far more than it happens. In this article, I unpack recent evidence on the benefits and pitfalls of school CPD, especially for subject specialists such as science teachers, and suggest a practical, research-aligned way forward.

What Research Actually Shows (2015–2025).

Over the last decade, dozens of studies, meta-analyses, and reviews have examined teachers’ professional development. The verdict? CPD can make a meaningful difference but only under specific conditions.

1. Impact varies greatly.
   Systematic reviews have revealed that well-designed CPD can improve teaching quality and student outcomes. Effect sizes range from small (≈ 0.06 SD) to moderate (Hedges’ g ≈ 0.34), depending on how long the training lasts and how tightly it connects to classroom practice (Darling-Hammond et al. 2017; Sims et al. 2022).
2. The “core features” of effective CPD are consistent.
   Across studies, the same five ingredients reappear: content focus, active learning, duration, coherence with school and curriculum goals, and collective participation (Gore et al., 2017; Education Policy Institute, 2020).
3. Follow-up coaching multiplies this effect.
   PD, which includes coaching, feedback, and peer observation, has a far greater impact than standalone workshops. Some of the strongest studies reported that teachers need 80+ hours of sustained PD to produce measurable gains in student performance (Gore et al., 2017). In short, short bursts rarely work: sustained, subject-specific, and collaborative learning.

The Benefits of Well-Designed CPDs.

When it’s done right, CPD is one of the most powerful levers schools have. Let us look at the key advantages.

1. Better Teaching Practice

Teachers who engage in active practice-based CPD demonstrate measurable improvements in classroom instruction. This is particularly true when they model, rehearse, and refine new strategies rather than simply listen to theory or attend a ‘one size fits all’ session.

2. Stronger Subject Expertise.

For science teachers, content-rich CPD improves both confidence and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), and more recently, technological pedagogical content knowledge (TCPK). It helps teachers make better conceptual connections, anticipate misconceptions, and design experiments that deepen understanding and thinking about relevant technology to use for content accessibility.

3. Collective Efficacy and Culture.

Department-wide CPD fosters shared goals, reduces professional isolation, and strengthens collective efficacy: the belief that “together, we can make a difference.” This belief, more than individual confidence alone, predicted better student outcomes.

4. Teacher Retention and Career Growth.

Well-structured, continuous professional learning enhances job satisfaction and retention. Early-career teachers, in particular, benefit when induction programs evolve into sustained CPD pathways that lead to expertise and leadership.

Consequences of Poorly Planned CPD.

However, many schools still fall into predictable traps. The following are the most common and costly mistakes:

1. The Once-Off Session.

A single afternoon session rarely changes classroom practice. Without follow-up or feedback, the “learning” evaporates before the next unit test.

2. The Generic Topic

Sessions like “Effective Assessment for All” or “Behaviour Management 101” might look inclusive, but they often lack subject relevance. Teachers need discipline-specific CPD: what works in science is not identical to what works in English.

3. Ignoring Teacher Voice.

Top-down CPD planning without consulting teachers reduces motivation and ownership. A needs-based approach, that is, asking staff what they actually need to improve, yields better results.

4. No Protected Time.

Expecting teachers to plan, experiment, and collaborate after hours undermines implementation. Research has consistently shown that without timetabled collaboration, good intentions crumble under workload pressures. Similarly, CPD sessions should never be viewed as time fillers by staff.

5. Weak Evaluation.

Measuring success through attendance sheets or “happy forms” (satisfaction surveys) misses the point. CPD must be evaluated by its impact on teaching and learning, not by how much teachers enjoy the biscuits to put it bluntly.

Research-aligned CPD Workflow.

Therefore, what does effective CPD appear in practice? The following five-stage cycle, grounded in international research, offers a structured and replicable approach.

1. Diagnose: Identify Real Needs, (needs analysis)

Use a mix of evidence, lesson observations, general talk, student performance data, and teacher self-assessments to identify 2–3 priority goals.
Mathematically, if you aim to raise achievement through 0.2 SD, how many hours and what kind of support are needed? Short bursts will not cut it; aim for sustained engagement across terms.

2. Design: Include the Core Features.

Build every CPD program around these proven pillars.

• Content focus (e.g., teacher demos or formative assessment in science experiments)
• Active learning (modelling, rehearsal, micro-teaching of a difficult concept, and peer work).
• Coherence with curriculum and school goals.
• Duration: spaced over weeks or months.
• Collective participation within departments.

Set dosage targets. Evidence suggests that at least 40–120 hours of structured learning (including coaching) per year is required for measurable change.

3. Deliver: Blend Methods.

The use of workshops to spark ideas -the Joyce & Showers model–could be handy here, but link them to in-class coaching and peer collaboration. Lesson study, video feedback, and co-teaching cycles translate abstract ideas into daily routine. Teachers want to talk about their practice, not to listen for ‘hours.’ Protect dedicated CPD time in the timetable, professional learning should not be an after-hours hobby.

4. Embed: Sustained through coaching.

Teachers require repetition and reflection. Use coaching cycles (observe → feedback → reteach) and professional learning communities (PLCs) to anchor new habits. Encourage reflective practices (journals) or annotations in their planning, shared planning, and short video reflections to monitor progress.

5. Evaluate: Measure What Matters.

Go beyond the attendance logs. Evaluate:

• Teacher practice (observation rubrics).
• Teacher knowledge or beliefs (validated surveys).
• Student outcomes (test scores, lab performance, and project rubrics).

Tools like CPD-REACTION (Ayivi-Vinz et al., 2022) can be adapted to measure intention and behaviour change, ensuring your evaluation goes deeper than “it felt useful.” Define success metrics in advance; even an effect size of 0.2–0.4 SD improvement in a targeted area over a year is an ambitious but achievable goal.

Quick Checklist for School Leaders.

Ask yourself these five questions before booking your next CPD day.

✅ Have we done a teacher needs analysis this term?
✅ Is the topic content-specific and curriculum-aligned?
✅ Will there be coaching or observation within two weeks?
✅ Is there protected collaboration time on the timetable?
✅ Are success metrics clearly defined and measurable?

If you answer “no” to more than one, pause, you might be planning a morale event, not professional development.

Looking forward: From ritual to rigor.

Let’s be honest. Too many schools treat CPD as an annual ritual, that is, part training, part theatre, and part box ticking. Research from 2015 to 2025 has urged a cultural shift from ritualistic events to rigorous learning systems.

We must design a CPD similar to a scientific experiment.

• Identify the hypothesis (What do we want to improve?)
• Control variables (Time, focus, participants)
• Measure outcomes (Behaviour change, student performance)
• Iterate the design (Refine based on data)

This mindset aligns beautifully with the scientific method — hypothesis, experiment, and evaluation — and that is precisely what evidence-based teaching deserves.

Final Thoughts: The Future of CPD in Schools.

The coming decade will test whether schools can transform CPD from an administrative exercise to an engine of professional excellence. Emerging evidence (Sims et al., 2022; Education Policy Institute, 2020) shows that schools investing in sustained, evidence-driven professional learning see consistent gains in teacher quality and student achievements.

The message is clear: good CPD is neither cheap nor quick, but the cost of ineffective CPD, wasted time, teacher burnout, and stagnant outcomes is far greater.

If you are a school leader or department head, consider your challenge: commission change, not events. Build CPD systems that are disciplined, data-driven, and dignified because when teachers grow deliberately, students grow exponentially.

References (Selected 2015–2025)

• Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute.
• Gore, J., et al. (2017). Effects of Professional Development on the Quality of Teaching. Educational Research.
• Education Policy Institute. (2020). The Effects of High-Quality Professional Development.
• Sims, S., et al. (2022). Effective Teacher Professional Development: New Theory and Evidence.
• Ayivi-Vinz, G., et al. (2022). Use of the CPD-REACTION Questionnaire to Evaluate Professional Learning Outcomes.
• Meta-analyses of STEM teacher PD (2019–2025) showing positive average effects tied to duration, content focus, and follow-up coaching.

​About the Author​

Prof. Dr. Caleb Moyo is an educational researcher, science tutor, and workshop facilitator who is passionate about evidence-based teaching, ethical leadership, and professional growth in education.