Teacher educators, all those who actively facilitate the (formal) learning of student teachers and teachers, are perceived as crucial players for maintaining the quality of the teacher workforce and educational provision (European Commision, 2013). However, only in the last two decades has the professional development of this specific profession received more explicit acknowledgement from (inter)national policy (e.g. OECD, 2018). As such, research on teacher educators’ professional development is steadily increasing, seeking to address several contemporary challenges in education (Vanderlinde et al., 2021). In this paper, we focus on current issues of diversity, inclusion, equity and social justice in education; and its meaning for the practices of higher education-based teacher educators. Nowadays, all educational professionals are challenged to ensure equity and justice in education for everyone, regardless of identity markers (Gay, 2018; Vantieghem et al., 2020); and thus, to deal with diversity. For higher education-based teacher educators in particular, this challenge of dealing with diversity is twofold: (a) to examine the learning environments they create themselves, and (b) to prepare student teachers to do the same (Lunenberg & Guberman, 2019). Teacher educator practices to deal with diversity have the potential to address both, since the way teacher educators teach inherently has a modelling and instructive value for student teachers (Lunenberg et al., 2007). Unfortunately, knowledge on teacher educator practices to deal with diversity is still scarce in the education literature. Therefore, a prior systematic literature review was conducted in which five general clusters of practices of teacher educators to deal with diversity were uncovered. These clusters were: (1) creating inclusive learning environments, (2) challenging student teachers’ frames of reference, (3) explicit modelling for diversity, (4) challenging one’s own frame of reference, and (5) raising societal diversity sensitivity. In this paper, we elaborate on these findings and attempt to address the gap in the literature. The aims are: (a) to validate the result of the literature review in the Flemish context of teacher education; and (b) to understand how Flemish teacher educators engage in practices to deal with diversity. Within the context of Flanders, the Dutch-speaking region of Belgium, the following research questions were put forward: ‘What practices to deal with diversity do teacher educators engage in?’, and ‘What encourages or prevents teacher educators from engaging in particular practices to deal with diversity?’ 

Drawing upon the interpretative tradition, a qualitative research design was chosen to address the research questions (Mortelmans, 2013). In particular, semi-structured interviews were organised with Flemish teacher educators (n=14). A combination of convenience and snowball sampling was used to find a heterogenous group of participants, corresponding with the heterogenous profession of higher education-based teacher educators (Tack et al., 2018). As such, the participating teacher educators work in four different teacher education programmes (i.e., kindergarten, primary, and lower and upper secondary education) in three different institutions (i.e., two teacher education colleges and one university), taking on three different roles (i.e., domain-specific, pedagogical/didactical and practicum-oriented). Verbatim transcriptions of the interviews were made and a constant comparative analysis was conducted to find commonalities and differences in the data (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Hence, a tentative a-priori coding scheme was developed of sensitising concepts found in the literature review. Respecting the iterative and inductive nature of our method, we extended the coding scheme with in-vivo codes in the open coding phase. In the axial coding phase, recurring and overlapping codes were categorised in order to reduce the data significantly. Finally, in the selective coding phase, we examined possible relationships between the concepts that emerged by linking them with each other (Mortelmans, 2013). Clear documentation and subsequent discussions within our research team about emerging concepts and relationships from the data assured the quality of the research process. Moreover, the first author engaged in constant reflection while collecting and coding the data by keeping reflective memos of interviews and coding work.

Preliminary results suggest that all clusters of practices found in our prior systematic literature are present in the Flemish teacher education context. However, not all teacher educators engage in all these practices. The data indicates how institutional and personal factors can affect teacher educator practices to deal with diversity. For example, on the level of the institution, big class sizes and the lack of a common vision in the curriculum on diversity, were for some participants restricting factors to deal with diversity properly. Personal and professional beliefs regarding diversity, role perception of teacher educators, prior professional development and field experience are some factors that affected practices at a personal level. Additionally, the data revealed multiple tensions between teacher educators’ personal and institutional agendas when engaging in practices to deal with diversity (e.g. feeling pressured to work more inclusively, while professional beliefs only partly agree with the desirability of it). Such tensions resonate with other teacher educator research (e.g. Berry, 2007), highlighting the complexity of the profession and the need for appropriate professional development initiatives to foster awareness and provide coping strategies. In conclusion, this paper makes a theoretical contribution to the field of teacher educator research (a) by expanding prior descriptions of teacher educator practices to deal with diversity; (b) by presenting factors that influence the practices teacher educators engage in; and (c) by noting the tensions that arise. Future studies in other teacher education contexts are needed to further validate these theoretical assertions (Mortelmans, 2013). Lastly, we also made an empirical contribution by validating earlier literature review findings, giving teacher educators and policy makers guidance for professional development initiatives.

- Berry, A. (2007). Tensions in teaching about teaching. Understanding practice as a teacher educator. Self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (Vol. 5). Springer. - European Commission. (2013). Supporting teacher educators for better learning outcomes. https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/education/policy/school/doc/support-teacher-educators_en.pdf - Gay, G. (2018). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice (3rd ed.). Teachers College Press. - Lunenberg, M., & Guberman, A. (2019, August 6). Teacher educators and diversity. International Forum for Teacher Educator Development. https://info-ted.eu/diversity. - Lunenberg, M., Korthagen, F., & Swennen, A. (2007). The Teacher Educator as a Role Model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 586-601. - Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage. - Mortelmans, D. (2013). Handboek kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethoden. Acco. - OECD. (2018). Education at a glance 2018: OECD indicators. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2018_eag-2018-en. - Tack, H., Valcke, M., Rots, I., Struyven, K., & Vanderlinde, R. (2018). Uncovering a hidden professional agenda for teacher educators: A mixed method study on Flemish teacher educators and their professional development. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 86–104. - Vanderlinde, R., Smith, K., Murray, J., & Lunenberg, M. (Eds.), Teacher Educators and their Professional Development: Learning from the past, looking for the future. Routledge. - Vantieghem, W., Roose, I., Gheyssens, E., Griful-Freixenet, J., Keppens, K., Vanderlinde, R., Struyven, K., & Van Avermaet, P. (2020). Professional vision of inclusive classrooms: A validation of teachers’ reasoning on differentiated instruction and teacher-student interactions. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 67, 100912.