The purpose of this paper is to examine how the gap between practice and theory as a result of the out-of-field phenomenon becomes a reality in classrooms. The paper turns focus to specific out-of-field teaching practices, traditions and cultures and the implications it has for policy decisions to support and develop teachers in these positions. Out-of-field teaching is defined in this paper as teachers who teach outside their field of expertise or qualification, the field being a subject or year level. An in-depth understanding of the meaning out-of-field teaching practices have for effectiveness and quality teaching is closely connected to resourceful policies is discussed in this paper. The transnational research design is guided by the central research question: What does the out-of-field phenomenon mean for the quality education, teachers’ effectiveness and educational leaders’ decisions in relation to policy-making? International research claims that the out-of-field phenomenon is a widespread global issue (Ingersoll, 2002). I highlight through this investigation that the phenomenon has implications for quality teaching in secondary and primary schools across cultures. Lived experiences implied through the out-of-field phenomenon are often misunderstood with implications for policy making. The qualitative research design offers an opportunity to take an in-depth look at the life-world of participants. The paper employs Gadamer’s philosophy of understanding as the essence to offer different perspectives of real life experiences regarding the out-of-field phenomenon. Gadamer’s (1975; 1976) hermeneutic phenomenological concepts and ontological principles offer a framework of connecting, engaging, interpreting, and communicating human experience and need. The study reports on what the out-of-field phenomenon means for effective teaching practices, quality of teachers, and the support these teachers in out-of-positions need to develop into experts. The needs of teachers are intertwined with policy development, teacher turnover, attrition and retention concerns (Ingersoll, 2002). This investigation unveils a need for targeted policies in order to effectively manage the out-of-field phenomenon.

The paper acknowledges the teaching space as the most influential aspect of the learning environment (Bourdieu, 2010) and reflects concerns about the gap in policies that further affects already complex learning spaces. The objective of the paper is to provide insight into an international concern closely connected to expectations for teacher effectiveness and the pressure on governments to provide quality education. Reflection on the out-of-field phenomenon as an international dilemma is grounded in literature about teacher competencies, quality teaching practices, demand and supply concerns as issues in countries such as Ireland (Ni Rỉodáin, 2014), Australia (Hobbs, 2013), the US (Ingersoll, 2002), European countries (Bonesrønning, Falch & Strøm, 2003;) such as Germany (Törner, 2014) as well as South Africa (Du Plessis, 2013). The paper offers a fusion of horizons (Gadamer, 1976;1975) through ontology and subjectivist epistemology as mechanisms towards developing a deep understanding that accentuates discovery, description and meaning while embracing a hermeneutic phenomenological approach ( Laverty, 2003).

Bonesrønning, H., Falch, T. & Strøm, B. (2003). Teacher sorting, teacher quality and student composition. European Economic Review, 49(2005), 457-483. Doi:10.1016/S0014-2921(03)00052-7 Bourdieu, P. (2010). (25th ed). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st–Century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(3): pp. 300-314. Day, C., Kington, A., Stobart, G., & Sammons, P. (2006). The Personal and Professional Selves of Teachers: Stable and Unstable Identities. British Educational Research Journal, 32(4): pp. 601-616. Du Plessis, A. (2013). Understanding the out-of-field teaching experience. Retrieved online http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:330372 Gadamer, H. (1989). Truth and Method. (2nd ed). (Trans. J. Weinsheimer & D. Marshall), continuum, New York. Hobbs, L. (2013). Teaching ‘out-of-field’ as a boundary-crossing event: Factors shaping teacher identity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2013(11), 271–297. Ingersoll, R. (2002). Out of field teaching, educational inequality, and the organisation of schools: an exploratory analysis. Retrieved from http://www.ctpweb.org/full text as accessed on 16 March 2004. Laverty, S. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2 (3), Article 3, Retrieved 22nd June 2011 from http:// www.ualberta.ca/-iiqm/backissues/2_3final/pdf/laverty.pdf Lobo, J., & Vizcaino, A. (2006). Finding a voice through research. Art & Humanities in Higher Education, 5(3), 305-316. Maaranen, K., Kynäslahti, H. & Krokfors, L. (2008). Learning a teacher’s work. Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(2): pp. 133-145. Nias, J. (1996). Thinking about feeling: the emotion in teaching. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26 (3): pp. 293-306. Ni Rỉodáin, M. (2014). Out-of-field mathematics teaching and the need for professional development: The Irish context. TAS Collective Symposioum. 30-31 August 2014, Portugal. Scott, D. (2008). Critical essays on major curriculum theorists. New York: Routledge. Törner, G. (2014). Underqualified mathematics teachers or out-of-field teaching in mathematics in Germany. TAS Collective Symposioum. 30-31 August 2014, Portugal.