01 SES 03 B, Professional Continuity and Teacher Learning
Research questions, objectives, and theoretical framework (568 words)
In autumn 2004 we began a longitudinal study of 22 elementary (K-8) teachers who had just completed their preparation program and were beginning full-time teaching. In this paper we report especially on their 12th to 14th years of teaching, i.e., to summer 2018 (by which time 2 had left the study, reducing the sample to 20), and focus in particular on their growth in these three years. Our research questions were:
- To what extent did the teachers continue to learn as they entered mid-career?
- What were some of the key areas of learning?
- What gave rise to this learning?
- How could their learning have been further enhanced?
Many outsiders assume that learning to teach occurs mainly during pre-service preparation and the first few years of practice, after which teachers enter a “plateau,” either because they are lazy and uncaring or because there is not much left to learn (because teaching is primarily transmission of subject content). Our position, by contrast, is that most teachers care a great deal about students and their learning, and they continue to learn in varying degrees throughout their career; furthermore, we believe this ongoing learning is essential because of the great breadth and complexity of teaching: it is not just transmission of subject content (Chapman & West-Burnham, 2010; Dewey, 1916; Feiman-Nemser, 2001, 2012; Lieberman, 2018). To the extent that the rate of teacher learning does decrease, this is due partly to insufficient awareness of the complexity of teaching; partly to the increasing challenges of teaching leading to exhaustion and demoralization; and partly to lack of system support in meeting these challenges and continuing to learn (Day & Gu, 2014; Huberman, 1989, 1993; Sahlberg, 2015).
The theoretical framework of our research study is broadly constructivist (Ahsan & Smith, 2016; Brooks, 2011; Piaget, 1932, 1968; Richardson, 1997). According to Piaget, all knowledge needs constant modification by individuals to adjust to their distinctive personality, insights, and situation; and in our view this applies as much to teacher professional knowledge as student knowledge. Admittedly, social constructivist Vygotsky (1978), along with Piaget, stresses the need for external input: a degree of “scaffolding” by “expert others” is important. But such input must be dialogical rather than top-down: individuals still have a crucial part to play in building their co-constructed knowledge.
In addition to emphasizing the individual’s role in knowledge creation, constructivism supports the understanding of teacher knowledge as broad and complex. Knowledge reflects a whole way of life, including the personal, emotional, and social as well as the intellectual. According to Piaget (1968), individual construction is required not only for sound academic knowledge but for our whole being; it is essential if any organism – human or otherwise – is to survive and thrive. Where the “structures” (cognitive or otherwise) we encounter in the world are useful as they stand, we largely accept or “accommodate to” them (pp. 63 & 71), but where they are not useful we have to change or “assimilate” them to a form more suited to our needs (p. 71). Constructivism, then, is not just an academic and pedagogical approach but a fundamental strategy of everyday life. This again points to the necessity of ongoing teacher learning, since teachers cannot possibly build knowledge of such breadth and complexity in just a few years: it takes a whole career (Day et al., 2007; Huberman, 1989, 1993).
Methods/methodology (337 words) As noted, our longitudinal study began in 2004 and followed 20 elementary teachers (originally 22) across their initial years of teaching. The study is ongoing, but in this paper we report especially on the three school years 2015-16 to 2017-18, that is, their 12th, 13th, and 14th years of teaching. We interviewed them each year and as far as possible observed in their classrooms. The participants taught in several school districts within a large metropolitan area; most were in relatively low SES public schools with a very diverse student population. While we have explored many aspects of the teachers’ experience and development over the years, in the past three years we asked the teachers about (among other things) the extent of their change, areas of change, and how these changes came about. Each interview was approximately 60-75 minutes in length and was recorded and transcribed. The same questions were asked of all participants in a given year, although probe questions were also asked and additional comment by the teachers was welcomed. Many questions remained the same from year to year, but different questions were also asked to reflect the teachers’ career stage, emerging issues in the field, and specific topics we wanted to explore more fully. Our research approach was qualitative, as defined by Merriam (2009), Punch (2014), and Savin-Baden and Major, (2013). For example, we had a modest sample (the 20) and studied them in some depth; our interview questions were largely open-ended; and the themes emerged as the study progressed. In analyzing the transcripts, we began by reading them several times to identify themes or "codes" related to the central issues of the study. We then developed a table of themes matched to participants and, going through the materials again, recorded where reference was made to each topic. The longitudinal nature of the study meant we were able to gain the trust of the teachers and get a fuller knowledge of their views, practices, and changes over time (Menard, 2002; Saldaña, 2003).
Expected outcomes/results In this conference proposal, we outline some of the changes that occurred in the teachers’ views, practices, situation, and morale in Years 12 to 14. In the final presentation we will give more detailed information and examples. 1. The teachers’ pedagogical views and practices developed in many ways during their 12th to 14th years in the profession. All reported having changed to a substantial degree. For example, they integrated subjects and topics more; made subject content more relevant; assessed students in more flexible ways; increased their use of digital technology; and gave students greater choice and autonomy. 2. The changes occurred as a result of several influences, especially informal ones. Influences included their own reading and reflections, trial and error in the classroom, informal discussion with colleagues, and visiting internet sites. Formal professional development activities also played a role, but the most influential were those where the teachers had an opportunity to interact with facilitators and each other rather than simply being told what to do. 3. Nearly all the teachers reported working under increasingly difficult circumstances, but on the whole this did not prevent them from continuing to improve their practice. Although they felt themselves in an era of challenge and risk, they experienced quite high levels of motivation and satisfaction and intended to continue in the profession, while in many cases they were seeking to adjust their role (e.g., greater specialization, a change in grade level). None expressed interest in school administration, partly because of the current challenges. 4. It seemed to us that, with more support, the teachers could have developed their practice even more. Generally, their improvements were achieved with little support from the larger system and the local school administration. In cases where their principal was supportive this made a large difference.
References (385 words) Ahsan, S., & Smith, W. (2016). Facilitating student learning: a comparison of classroom and accountability assessment. In W. Smith (Ed.). The global testing culture: shaping education policy, perceptions, and practice (pp. 131- 151). Didcot, UK: Symposium Books. Brooks, J. (2011). Big science for growing minds: constructivist classrooms for young thinkers. New York: Teachers College Press. Chapman, L., & West-Burnham, J. (2010). Education for social justice: Achieving wellbeing for all. London & New York: Continuum. Day, C., Sammons, P., Stobart, G., Kington, A., & Gu, Q. (2007). Teachers matter: Connecting lives, work, and effectiveness. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2014). Resilient teachers, resilient schools: building and sustaining quality in testing times. London/New York: Routledge. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2012). Teachers as learners. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055. Huberman, M. (1989). The professional life cycle of teachers. Teachers College Record, 91(1), 31-57. Huberman, M. (1993). The lives of teachers (trnsl. J. Neufeld). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Lieberman, A. (2018). Teaching, learning and living: joining practice and research. London and New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis. Menard, S. (2002). Longitudinal research (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A Guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Noddings, N. (2013). Education and democracy in the 21st century. New York: Teachers College Press. Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child (transl. M. Gabain). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Piaget, J. (1968). Structuralism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Punch, K. (2014). Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches (3rd edn.). Los Angeles & London: Sage. Richardson, V. (Ed.) (1997). Constructivist teacher education: Building a world of new understandings. London: Falmer. Sahlberg, P. (2015). Finnish lessons 2.0: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? (2nd edn.). New York: Teachers College Press. Saldaña, J. (2003). Longitudinal qualitative research : analyzing change through time. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.