of the categories as basic, developing and integrated likewise was informed by
former research (Timperley 2011 ).
The categories were iteratively developed, but applying the categories to the
pre-data in retrospect, all the schools were at what corresponds to level 1 or 2 before
the project. There was great variation, e.g., most of the schools in one municipality
were at level 2, while all schools in another municipality were at level 1. Alongside
the involvement in QUEST a great variation in development was observed.
Implementing the local collaborative part of the QUEST rhythm was obviously
easier for the schools that already had a culture of regular meetings at the start of the
project, and these differences were still reflected in the municipalities’self-reports
after½year. This variation did, however, become less pronounced over time, and
when coding according to the categories in Table21.1after 2½years (two coders)
the main differences were between schools not so much between municipalities. The
distribution was 8% at level 1, 34% at level 2, 48% at level 3, and 10% at level 4.
Data after 2½years is used here since the last period of the QUEST project saw
major national school reforms and municipal changes in school districts, school
fusions, etc. In one municipality that took part in the project, for example, many
science teachers were relocated to new schools. This resulted in a lot of“noise”in
the open reflections that accompanied thefinal questionnaire, hence it mainly
pre-reform data is discussed here. The institutionalization activities were, however,
implemented and by the end of the project local network and PLC activities were
stabilized in allfive municipalities, despite the challenges posed by the reforms.
These networks continued after the project hadfinished, and they also maintained
Table 21.1 Categories synthesizing the level of changes at the QUEST schools
Category Description- Pre-PLC Hard to arrange meetings. When meetings do happen purchases of materials
and equipment for the science labs top the agenda. A limited amount of local
trials with new tools and approaches. Individual teachers exchanging ideas,
but no joint work - PLC basic Regular meetings. Purchases of materials and equipment for the science labs
still high on the agenda, but a culture of exchange of ideas, strategies, and
teaching experiences are (slowly) developing. New tools and approaches are
tried out in local classrooms, mainly by copying activities from the network
seminars, and following concrete assignments - PLC
developing
Exchange of ideas, materials and strategies are consolidated. Evidence
informed discussions of student learning based on data from local inquiries.
PLC meetings are typically active and with hands-on activities and
discussions. Teachers report about positive outcomes from the meetings in
relation to their own teaching. Both things indicate the gradual development
of a shared responsibility- PLC
integrated
Joint planning and discussions into student learning, like in an inquiry and
knowledge building cycle (Timperley 2011 ). Not just copying activities
from network seminars, but adjustment to the local context and collaborative
redesign. New experiments going beyond but inspired by network seminars:
generative changes, shared responsibility, and gradual development of a
shared vision21 A QUEST for Sustainable Continuing Professional Development 321