The education of teachers is increasingly subject to analysis and discussion.  A crucial element of this debate is that contributors should share similar understandings of the terminology used in the discourse. However, a review of the literature in the field reveals anomalies in the terms used. This has the potential to give rise to confusion among the international community. Indeed, shared understanding may be further compromised by a geographically specific interpretation of a phrase.

A multiplicity of terms pervade the literature - ‘teacher training’, ‘teacher education’, ‘in-service’, ‘professional development’, ‘professional learning’ and ‘teacher learning’. Within a single publication the terms are frequently used interchangeably and without great consistency. For instance, one phrase was found to signify a range of quite different concepts while, conversely, a distinct concept was referred to through a variety of phrases. Such inconsistency contributes to a lack of clarity surrounding the field.

The varying terminology used in the literature is, perhaps, symptomatic of underlying tension in the conflicting perceptions of the nature and purpose of teacher education. The confusion surrounding the terminology used in discussing teacher education may be perceived as the surface reflection of the debate on teacher professionalism, teacher knowledge, and the relative importance accorded to theory and practice in the discourse. In this regard, it may be construed as an expression of the different philosophical origins of perceptions of teacher education.

While recent changes in terminology usage in the field have achieved a certain level of consensual understanding, there is a need for further clarity and the widespread adoption of a universal lexis.

This paper traces changes in the teacher education discourse and links them to the changing perceptions of education for pre-service and in-career teachers. The paper then proceeds to offer a resolution to the incoherence of the terminology and a model of the lexicon is proposed. The dimensions of this model are elucidated and graphic representation is shown to encompass current usage. The benefit to the international community in terms of enhanced clarity is outlined.

Cordingley et al. (2007 Clarke & Hollingsworth, (2002) Cochran-Smith, M. (2004) Day & Gu (2007) Easton (2008) Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). Forlin, (2010) Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001) Hargreaves, A. (2000) Ingvarson, L., Beavis, A., & Kleinhenz, E. (2007) Joyce, B., Showers, B., & Rolheiser-Bennett. (1987). Killeavy, M. (2006) Kwakman, (2003) Sugrue, (2002) Webster-Wright, (2009) Wei, Darling-Hammond et al (2009) Wilson, S., & Berne, J. (1999) Zeichner, K. (2010)