- Email: [email protected]
Obstacles as opportunities in the promotion of teachers’ learning
ARTICLE IN PRESS
International Journal of Educational Research 41 (2004) 353–366 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijedures
Chapter 5
Obstacles as opportunities in the promotion of teachers’ learning Gary James Harfitt, Nicole Judith Tavares Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong
Abstract This paper describes the professional growth of two teacher educators. It notes obstacles to teachers’ professional development, and investigates the factors which make some teachers less vulnerable to challenges. The paper observes that teacher educators who engage in self-study can reach a renewed understanding of their roles both in and beyond the classroom. The 3-year study on which the paper focuses aims at self-improvement, and takes the form of ongoing and reflective interaction with pre-service and in-service teachers in a post-graduate diploma course at The University of Hong Kong. Data were gathered from multiple sources: the collaborative lesson-planning experiences with the student–teachers, lesson observations, student–teachers’ post-lesson reflections, retrospective interviews, and various types of online communication. The paper explores what constitutes the inner power of student–teachers and how the teacher educators can play a more vital role in connecting the disconnected teachers by empowering them to turn obstacles into opportunities. Through the journey and dynamics of co-learning with the student–teachers and teachers at schools, the paper further discusses how these obstacles have become opportunities for the teacher educators’ mutual gains in professional growth and inner strength. r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Professional learning; Reflective teaching; Collegial support; Collaboration; Teacher change
Corresponding author. Fax: +852 28585649.
E-mail addresses: gharfi[email protected] (G.J. Harfitt), [email protected] (N.J. Tavares). 0883-0355/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.006
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
354
1. Introduction The dilemma facing the teacher below is at the heart of the examination of the inner lives of teachers in Hong Kong. It is largely representative of the voices of teachers in many other parts of the world. y I still think I tend to be teacher-dominated, and communicate with my students in the typical deductive manner of asking questions. But I am changing, and I want to continue to change in this way. Yet even as I say this, I am very aware that my teacher peers are there only to get students through the exams with the highest scores possible. Unfortunately, the system is in place. I know that if I advocate any change I will most likely lose my joby I feel very insecure in the tension that exists between what I am taught in the course and the reality of the teaching environment. What am I to do? I do plan to move ahead and try to apply what I am learning from the coursey But again, I have to follow the programme as dictated by the school; yet I do believe that I am creating a more positive ‘‘deep learning’’ environment for my Form 1 class and will continue to move in that direction with my Form 3 classyI am very pleased that they want to work with that approach more after the mid-term exams. It is a great challenge to think about how I will do that and still meet the requirements laid out in the ‘‘scheme of work Bible’’y I will try because I do not want to be mediocre. It is against my natural desire and training to be that wayy (Cary, an in-service teacher on a Postgraduate Diploma in Education course at The University of Hong Kong, December 2003). Here is an educator who is striving to become a better teacher. He is trying his best to overcome some of the limitations he has identified for himself, and find room to experiment with some of the ideas gleaned from his teacher education course. Yet he is faced with several obstacles—pressure from the school authority to adhere to the school syllabus, conflicting views towards teaching from his colleagues, and pragmatic concerns over job security. All these external or structural inhibitors and the psychological burden they impose on him clearly have a negative impact on his self-belief and sense of autonomy in the classroom. Despite the desire he expresses to overcome the tensions, the frustration he has to endure and opposing forces he has to combat is overwhelming. Awareness of such obstacles has prompted us, who are both teacher educators at The University of Hong Kong, to study the inner power that teachers like Cary have that make them feel empowered, amidst all the pressures, to ‘‘move ahead’’. This echoes Wajnryb’s belief (1992) that ‘teachers themselves are the primary initiators of their own development. The spirit of enquiry, the wish to reflect on one’s own teaching, perhaps to explore other paths, comes from within the practitioner; it cannot be imposed from outside’. It also reinforces Fullan’s (1993) observation that teachers cannot be given a purpose, because purposes must come from within. The work of Stigler underpins this, and in particular the assertion by Stigler and Hiebert (1999) that ‘teaching lies within the control of teachers. It is something that we can study and improve’. Yet for us, there is a fundamental need to go beyond simply
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
355
studying teachers to the study of their teaching context and to our own self-study—a need to deepen our understanding of the ‘why’ of their and our practice.
2. Learning through self-study 2.1. Why self-study We have both taught in mainstream secondary schools in Hong Kong for around a decade, served as heads of department in our schools for a significant period of our teaching, and made the transition from teaching at the secondary level to taking up teacher education courses at The University of Hong Kong. Since 2001, we have conducted over 500 school visits in our capacity as supervisors to our pre-service and in-service teachers during their teaching practicum. Through interaction with these student–teachers both in and out of class, through post-lesson conferences with them and reading their written reflections, through written exchanges with them via different forms of web-based communication, and through our critical review of their teaching experiences, questions have been raised which have serious implications not only for the teachers and their schools but equally for us as teacher educators who are dedicated to presenting ourselves as models of good teaching and to promoting teaching excellence in our courses. 2.2. Teacher educators as researchers It has been argued that student–teachers gain advantage from sharing the professional knowledge of experienced educators (Brown, McIntyre, & McAlpine, 1988). But does this suffice? Can student–teachers develop their own reflective and autonomous practice by depending solely on more experienced teachers or teacher educators? Our experience casts doubt on this, and leads us to challenge Caldwell’s (1997) argument that ‘experts’ from the university have a key role to play in the professional development of teachers within the school. When disseminating good practice in lectures and workshops, it is not uncommon for us to face resistance from student–teachers who might claim that the ideas discussed ‘‘wouldn’t work’’ in their schools. As teacher educators, we are convinced that we have a significant impact on our student–teachers’ learning, and can illuminate them on how the good practices we promote can work. Yet these perceived constraints and obstacles in their teaching contexts have often proven to be so powerful that they have evolved into underlying beliefs which we are convinced we have to overcome in order for professional development to occur. We therefore extend Fullan and Hargreaves’ (1992) proposition that improvements in quality of what goes on inside the classroom are highly dependent on improvements in what goes on outside it. Enlightened by these experiences, and informed by our analysis of their reflections, we have undertaken an in-depth process of self-study and improvement, with our initial focus placed on the study of the teachers’ lives. As teacher educators, we see
ARTICLE IN PRESS 356
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
these teachers’ obstacles as our obstacles; and these constraints become our constraints, which in turn create new challenges for us. We aspire to promote in our courses positive learning experiences for them. To achieve this, we feel we need to be critical of ourselves and our roles as researchers and teacher educators (Feldman, Paugh, & Mills, 2004). We ‘recognise the value of experience and reflection as contributors to the knowledge base of educators, which in turn, contributes to ‘‘ways of knowing’’’ (Brandenburg, 2005) which develop over time. We acknowledge the need to ‘take a research stance to our own teachingy to examine our own practice critically and systematically [so as to] understand better (our) own classroom’ (Stenhouse, 1975), through which we continually adapt, adjust and alter our practice as teacher educators ‘in response to the needs and concern of (our) students in their context’ (Loughran, 2002). We are convinced of the need to enter each teacher’s unique world of teaching and to make ourselves better ‘understanders’ (Freeman, 1990) of their specific context of work, to hear their voices of frustration, and to reflect on how we can play a more vital and supportive part in their professional development. This improvement-oriented journey into their lives, to deepen our understanding of our own roles and our professional as well as spiritual inquiry to explore pedagogies and structures which honour the inner-life dimension of the teachers and uncover it, forms the overarching focus of the paper. 2.3. Our research questions This study commenced with the following three research questions: (1) What are the obstacles perceived by local teachers in the classroom? (2) Why are some teachers more ready than others to overcome the obstacles and develop professionally? (3) What are the implications for the various stakeholders and how can we, as teacher educators, promote excellence in teaching amid the many constraints facing local teachers? These questions represent the starting point of an investigation of our student–teachers’ thoughts and practices. The reflective voices we gathered then served as an avenue through which we entered their inner lives, heightened our sensitivity to their needs, re-conceptualised our own teaching, reconstructed our ‘curriculum’ and moved towards developing ourselves into more effective teacher educators. For aspects which lie not so much within our control and with ‘what goes on outside’ the classroom, we hope to put forward recommendations to the parties concerned.
3. Recognising the obstacles faced by teachers in Hong Kong Participants of the study comprised 116 teachers from two cohorts of pre-service teachers and three cohorts of in-service teachers in our teacher education courses. To
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
357
address the first research question concerning the identification of perceived key obstacles to teachers’ professional development, an in-depth analysis of these student–teachers’ responses on their post-lesson reflection sheets was undertaken. The sheets focused on the limitations of the lessons and the teachers’ perceived gains in strength. They were completed within one week after lesson observations and supervisors’ evaluations of their teaching performance were conducted. Semistructured interviews based on the findings of the analysis were then held to furnish the study with more insight into how and why some teachers are more ready than others to overcome obstacles and develop professionally. Here we focus on a representative sample of student–teachers who demonstrated gains in inner strength to convince themselves that they could make a difference, on those who felt less vulnerable to obstacles, and on those who felt less paralysed when confronted with challenges (Fig. 1). Part of the post-lesson reflection sheet required teachers to name three main challenges that they faced in their teaching. From this, we were able to identify 183 and 365 references made to obstacles by the pre-service and in-service teachers respectively. These references were then coded, categorised, ranked and presented in Fig. 2. Many of the constraints that the student–teachers cited were structural and institutional—as denoted by the many references made to lack of time in completing sections of the textbook, finishing the syllabus and preparing students for assessment. These are clearly considered to be huge barriers for both groups, and translated into pressure, as Michelle an in-service teacher remarked: y constraints include the time available, the number of assessments, management’s priorities, e.g. accountability etcyDue to the tight teaching scheduleyI had no choice but to try and fit in as much as possible. In fact frustration normally does not arise from the lack of new ideas or ways to enhance students’ learning but the reality that there is little time to explore and to experiment in the classroom. Like most teachers in Hong Kong, I spend most of my time trying to get through the syllabus and preparing students for assessments. The frustration, as this teacher vividly depicts, stems from a number of external factors, ranging from the school syllabus and both school-based and public 2 Pre-service and 3 In-service Cohorts (n=154) 2003 – 2004 (pre-service full-time cohort)
n = 26
2002 – 2003 (pre-service full-time cohort)
n = 35
2003 – 2005 (in-service part-time cohort)
n = 28
2002 – 2004 (in-service part-time cohort)
n = 43
2001 – 2003 (in-service part-time cohort)
n = 22
Fig. 1. Distribution of post-lesson reflections received.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 358
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
% of responses of… Obstacles
Pre-service Teachers
In-service Teachers
Over-planning and time constraints
25.7%
10.4%
Interaction in the classroom
13.1%
10.4%
Giving instructions
8.7%
Being a strong leader / Empowerment
8.2%
Assigning roles / Grouping students
9.9%
Designing appropriate materials
9.3%
Involving all students in the lesson
7.9%
Dealing with less-able students
7.4%
Fig. 2. Summary of the major obstacles identified from teachers’ post-lesson reflection sheets.
assessment systems to expectations of heads of department, students, parents and other stakeholders. These constraints, which are often seen as being outside the control of teachers who do not occupy senior positions in their schools, have been well-documented (see, e.g. Ingersoll & Alsalam, 1997). Although a description of local obstacles and constraints may contribute to existing literature, it is perhaps more important to acknowledge how these forces have all added up to form mental inhibitions that make some teachers feel powerless and demoralised while others see this as a platform upon which they reflect, re-conceptualise and react in a positive and professional manner. Herein lies the crux. Indeed, teachers do have a ‘‘choice’’; and this is what Michelle came to realise in one of her later reflections: one should never dwell on the negatives but try to work as best as possible within the constraints in the context. We maintain that our student–teachers can be professionals like Michelle. We were eager to challenge ourselves to explore what we could do in our capacity as teacher educators in moving beyond expertise in our own teaching and disciplinary knowledge. We desired greater expertise in supervision of our student–teachers to help the ‘disconnected’ ones (Palmer, 1998) who feel that they lack sufficient empowerment and autonomy in the classroom to turn their obstacles into opportunities.
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
359
The teacher’s workplace presents us with a very different challenge to the psychological and structural obstacles faced by individual teachers highlighted earlier. From our study, while it was encouraging to see all our student–teachers attributing their gains in strength to the modelling of good practices by their university tutors and our pre-service cohorts to the mentoring environment at school, we were disappointed with the low ranking of the in-service cohorts’ citing of examples of collegial and mentoring support within their workplace (Fig. 3). This has aroused our concern not only for the devastating impact of the main structural inhibitor ‘time’ but also for the deprivation of autonomy they experience at school. The fact that the in-service teachers value feedback and are appreciative of as well as open to external support and assistance suggests the potentially positive influence of professional collaboration which is nonetheless insufficient in their own teaching context. This is exemplified in a revealing quote from another teacher Annie: It appears that the school has its existing system. Teachers often have to follow the set of rules and do whatever the school has offered. As a new teacher, it would seem inappropriate if you bring your ‘concern’ forward when no similar premise has been shared by other experienced teachers. Therefore it is even harder for new teachers to bring new ideas in. The fact that teachers like Annie face institutional barriers in the shape of their professional workplace creates a very different challenge for us. Teacher
References made and ranking order What / How have I improved?
My sensitivity and self-awareness in class
Pre-service Teachers (n=87)
In-service Teachers (n=163)
7 (6)
21 (1)
13 (2)
5 (11)
My tutor (HKU) has helped me a lot
9 (5)
16 (3)
My mentor has helped me learn a lot
9 (3)
Designing my own materials
My colleagues have helped me learn a lot
3 (16)
My planning is improving
4 (10)
12 (7)
Designing my own activities
15 (1)
9 (8)
Fig. 3. Areas in which the pre-service and in-service cohorts have identified to be gains in strength.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 360
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
empowerment should be brought to the fore. Instead of ignoring the professionalism of teachers, schools need to recognise that teachers, both novice and experienced, are assets and can contribute their expertise to staff development. The implications of this will be addressed in Section 4 of this paper. As teacher educators, we believe that we have designed a teacher education course that serves as a cognitive apprenticeship for our student–teachers to equip them with the necessary knowledge, skills and attitudes to meet the needs of the secondary school system in Hong Kong. Yet the findings have urged us to further address Cary’s question ‘‘What am I to do?’’ and inculcate a spirit of professional development in them so that they feel empowered like Michelle to critically reflect, analyse and positively modify their approaches when faced with external obstacles. Cary’s question also represents our question. The self-study and constant pursuit of ways of maximising the inner power of our student–teachers has not only reshaped our understanding of what it means to be a teacher educator but also provided us with opportunities to challenge our taken-for-granted assumptions and enhance our reflective practice. This will be examined in Section 5 of the paper.
4. Seeing obstacles as opportunities for learning In this part, the second and third research questions listed above will be addressed in order to illuminate how some teachers from this study have shown a willingness and ability to understand and overcome their constraints, both structural and institutional. By examining how our student–teachers have made strategic choices to counter their constraints, we have been able to expand our own knowledge base as teacher educators. Therefore, the final part of this paper focuses on how transformation has occurred within us, leading to sharpened awareness in our teaching and learning. 4.1. The teacher’s readiness to change and use of compensation strategies One of the most outstanding qualities discovered in the student–teachers, who displayed sensitivity towards the obstacles facing them, was their awareness of their own progress, their readiness to accept their existing limitations, their strong urge to improve, their dedication to extending their competence, their openness to positive change and, above all, their vocational vitality to transform hurdles into opportunities. In the interviews and in their reflections, they made frequent reference to ‘determination’, ‘perseverance’, ‘confidence’ and ‘flexibility’ in adapting to changes in their teaching contexts. A further aspect which distinguishes them from the average teacher was their courage to outlive their localised constraints as well as ability to make a difference in their effective deployment of compensation strategies (which should be seen in a positive light, unlike avoidance strategies which tend to stress the negative in teaching and learning). Claire, an in-service teacher, is a typical example of one who takes the initiative to create opportunities for herself to develop professionally and
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
361
overcomes the ‘time’ constraint that many perceive to be insurmountable through peer collaboration: At times, I ask my mentor and colleagues for advice, and they are always willing to help me improve. This academic year, all the Form 1 English teachers have worked very closely together and I sometimes get inspirations from them to experiment with new teaching ideasy After lessons, I often spend time reflecting on my teachingy My colleagues and I have evaluations of our lessons every now and then. And we strive for improvement in our teaching objectives, resources and strategiesy This reinforces Eraut’s observation (1994) of the need for more ‘regular reflection, self-evaluation and a disposition to learn from colleagues’ in developing professional expertise, and extends Wajnryb’s notion (1992) that teachers themselves are at the heart of the solution. For us then, as teacher educators, the challenge is how we can bring out these inner strengths in our student–teachers and create opportunities for those who are already empowered to cast a positive impact on their counterparts. 4.2. Bridging the teaching and learning gap The ample references our student–teachers have made to teachers—their university tutors and mentors—who have had positive influences on their teaching have once again reassured us of the visual impact expert teachers have in providing models of successful teaching that serve as scaffolding for teachers in attaining a greater degree of competence (Berliner, 1992, 1995). They have also reinforced our belief that we have a major impact on their pedagogical as well as professional growth. Nevertheless, we see ourselves as more than role models of exemplary practices in the classroom. We share Loughran and Northfield’s view (1998) that it is vital for the teacher educator’s teaching practice to be congruent with the expectations of our student–teachers’ developing practice and thus constantly challenge ourselves to reflect on the effectiveness of our own teaching and to make this reflective process public. We value not only the feedback we receive but also the interactive opportunities in which we engage our student–teachers, through which they experience how we set the stage for the teachers to rationalise their teaching decisions. More importantly, the occasions help them to ‘visualise’ how we make their positive and negative voices heard and respond to them in the most professional manner both in the session and in subsequent lessons through relative adjustments in accordance with their expressed needs. In sum, we aim to get our student–teachers to ‘feel’ our inner strength to advance in our teaching expertise and our dedication to critical inquiry of our own professional practice. To further create a temperament oriented to inquiry and a disposition towards investigating their own practice, we attach great importance to their teaching practicum experience. The developmental nature of the pre-lesson experience is amplified by creating opportunities for the student–teachers to take part in collaborative lesson-planning processes with their peers and teaching partners as
ARTICLE IN PRESS 362
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
‘critical friends’, mentors, university tutors and supervisors in micro-teaching and self-directed learning sessions at university-based classes, in school attachment schemes and through computer-mediated forms of communication. In line with Vygotskian theories that knowledge is constructed through dialogue and ‘situated’ in the settings of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991), we are convinced that such pre-lesson interactive discourse in the collaborative process adds to the impact of post-lesson conferences and urges students to problematise their established routines (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Tsui, 2003), and challenge their previously held beliefs. The arrangements can also help student teachers to see the ‘situated possibilities’ (Benner, Tanner, & Chesla, 1996) that they would otherwise not have seen, through which their competence will be stretched and reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action (Scho¨n, 1983) enhanced. The teachers may also become more ready to adopt an enquiry approach (Tavares, 2005), like Kathleen who reflected on her experience as follows: It was enlightening to get another person’s perspective on my lesson because that is not a luxury that I have at my ready disposal in school. The experience has shown me the importance of sharing my lesson plans with my colleagues, and the benefits of co-designing with teachers who are teaching similar classes. This reflective climate is reinforced in pre- and post-practicum sessions though different mechanisms. Lesson study and course development assessment tasks are designed to facilitate students in looking inwards to question and reconceptualise their own teaching though an in-depth, objective and critical analysis of a selected lesson by our pre-service teachers and of a series of lessons through a process of collective inquiry by the in-service teachers. Beyond class time, between sessions and during the teaching practicum, they are encouraged to continue to see each other as members of a community of practice through participation in online learning platforms, where the teacher educator plays the role of participant, mediator, catalyst and devil’s advocate to engage student–teachers in constructivist conversation, to facilitate peer support and collaboration as they function as inquirers and co-thinkers in exploring alternatives to teaching pedagogies in the face of obstacles and to promote their openness to positive change (Tavares, 2004). Having experienced the power of collaboration, the impact of collective inquiry and the significance of ongoing professional learning, it is our intention that the teachers sustain this spirit of reflection and extend this community of practice to their own workplace. 4.3. Overcoming institutional obstacles—working with schools to professionalise teachers If we want to bridge the teaching and learning gap, we also have to recognise the power that is within each school to promote professional growth in its teachers. This brings us back to Hargreaves’ belief (1997) that teachers’ professional growth is best
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
363
fostered in supportive and collaborative communities of practice with a shared vision if they can develop together with collegial support (Fullan & Hargreaves, 1992; Rosenholtz, 1989). It is also related to Stigler and Hiebert’s argument (1999) that pre-service education, ‘no matter how effective, cannot by itself produce continuous improvement. Continuous improvement requires ongoing opportunities to learn and improve while teaching.’ The concept of reculturing presented by Fullan (1993) and Hargreaves (1994) is relevant here. We speak from experience that staff development in Hong Kong schools is often hindered by the notion of ‘face’ and the fear of ‘hierarchy’ prevalent in the deeply rooted collective Confucian culture. Teachers new to the profession thus tend to regard colleagues in the senior management as authority figures, their heads of department as the main sources of wisdom, the more experienced as ‘Mr and Miss know-alls’, native-speaking English teachers as language ‘experts’, invited speakers from tertiary institutions and external bodies as ‘educational experts’, and themselves as inferior in all aspects. Yet there is no real evidence that teachers develop through such hierarchical systems and improve through the judgments and comments of others, particularly in in-service settings (Cosh, 1998). So in order for genuine staff development to exist, professional development to sustain on an ongoing and continuous basis and a true spirit of collaboration and collective inquiry to be cultivated, there may be a need to deritualise the more conventional approaches to staff development. To recognise teachers’ expertise in and understanding of their unique teaching contexts, we hope to urge school management to place greater trust in teachers. Management can also consider empowering teachers by moving them to the centre stage to play a more leading role in shaping staff development programmes, and devising tailor-made tasks that better address their needs. Lesson study workshops could be a possible start in such programmes to engage teachers in working collaboratively in promoting ‘continuous inquiry into practice’ through beginning to openly discuss and question their own instructional methods, thereby ‘promoting growth in practice’ (Lieberman & Miller, 1999). All this would then serve to not only enrich and sustain the spirit of reflection advocated by Scho¨n (1983) but also take the processes of collaborative lesson-planning, peer observation, lesson study and joint pursuit of knowledge even further so that they are no longer seen as a ‘‘luxury’’ rarely practised in schools. At the community level, it is imperative that mentoring is no longer solely perceived as a school–university partnership initiative to support novice teachers in their initial teacher development. Through disseminating good practices to schools in our capacity as invited speakers of both school-based and territory-wide staff development seminars, we hope to make schools aware that both beginning and experienced teachers can benefit from mentorship in different forms and at different stages of their teaching career. We advocate a system ‘devoid of hierarchy’ (Dantonio, 1995) where all teachers can be mentors to less experienced colleagues in a specific discipline and at the same time mentees of other colleagues and are engaged in a readily available learning network for mutual interdependence. Within such an environment, teachers will feel less inhibited to take part in an open and professional
ARTICLE IN PRESS 364
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
dialogue, engage in some form of joint inquiry about their teaching practices, discuss new strategies and explore new initiatives and experiment with them, pool resources and enhance their pedagogical expertise. Peer observation schemes could also be seen to be complementary to the co-learning environment with the focus shifted from formal appraisal to a more meaningful form of co-learning dialogue (Harfitt, 2003). This would enable teachers to ‘‘enjoy’’ peer observation just as much as Andrea does. I enjoy the process of observing my colleague’s class and being observed by her. I have gained a lot from it. Being an observer, I reflect on my own teaching. Being an observee, I enjoy my peer and supervisor giving me objective and constructive feedback. During the post-lesson sharing session, I develop a deeper understanding on my strengths and weaknesses.
5. Our growth as teacher educators In this paper, we have described how we have embraced learning through a reflective process of the study of the professional growth of our student–teachers as part of our study of ourselves. This self-study has not only highlighted the importance of constant (re-)evaluation of our pedagogies and reinforced our commitment to best practice but also reshaped our understanding of what inhibits teachers’ professional development. This reframing has encouraged us to be more critical in examining our own roles as teacher educators, in challenging the taken for granted, in problematising and reconceptualising our teaching and in arriving at renewed understanding of our own classrooms. We now create more space in our course for our student–teachers to articulate and reflect on the challenges and constraints they face; we structure our lessons around their ‘obstacles’ and help them see how this explicit recognition of their ‘obstacles’ can become ‘opportunities’ for our greater responsiveness to their needs, more effective teaching on our part and enhanced professional growth for both. We are also dedicated to building ‘a framework of support’ (Brandenburg, 2005), to engaging with student–teachers in ongoing reflective and interactive discourse and to challenging our ways of being a teacher educator (Feldman et al., 2004) as we share the same purpose—co-learning— and see our inner strength to improve with them. We maintain that, with the continuous support of the school which is the learning community in their closest proximity, teachers can unleash their inner power and stretch their teaching competence. Understanding the inner power of our student–teachers and their individual contexts is fundamental to our own development as teacher educators and this is an ongoing process which reminds us that ‘change is a journey, not a blueprint’ (Fullan, 1993). This takes us back to the start of the paper when one teacher revealed his frustrations, desire and inner strength to address the questions of ‘‘What am I to do?’’ so as to ‘‘move ahead’’. Two years later, alongside our constant pursuit of ways of developing our teaching excellence and establishing of an environment for collaborative renewal, this teacher
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
365
graduated from the course with a testimony of his personal growth and increased inner power. I really appreciated being able to explain in detail my fears about moving into ‘uncharted areas’ of teachingy I was prepared emotionally for this and ‘made the jump’y It has been quite a journey and I no longer find the commitment to grow, change and keep improving as a teacher a threatyI will continue to grow and am confident that I can become an evermore effective teacher as I continue to sharpen and utilise the skills I have learned from (the course)y (Cary, March 2005)
References Benner, P., Tanner, C. A., & Chesla, C. A. (1996). Expertise in nursing practice: Caring, clinical judgment and ethics. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves—An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Illinois: Open Court. Berliner, D. C. (1992). The nature of expertise in teaching. In F. K. Oser, A. Dick, & J. L. Patry (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching: The new synthesis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Berliner, D. C. (1995). The development of pedagogical expertise. In P. K. Siu, & P. T. K. Tam (Eds.), Quality in education: Insights from different perspectives. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Research Association. Brandenburg, R. (2005). Self-study as a means of understanding and embracing the complexities of (re)learning as a teacher educator. Paper presented at the 12th ISATT International Conference, 3–6 July, Sydney, New South Wales. Brown, S., McIntyre, D., & McAlpine, A. (1988). The knowledge which underpins the craft of teaching. Edinburgh: Scottish Council for Research in Education. Caldwell, B. J. (1997). The impact of self-management and self-government on professional cultures of teaching: A strategic analysis for the twenty-first century. In A. Hargreaves, & R. Evans (Eds.), Beyond educational reform: Bringing teachers back in. Buckingham: Open University Press. Cosh, J. (1998). Peer observations in higher education—A reflective approach. Innovations in Education and Training International, May 1998, 35(2), 171–176. Dantonio, M. (1995). Collegial coaching: Inquiry into the teaching self. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: The Falmer Press. Feldman, A., Paugh, P., & Mills, G. (2004). Self-study through action research. In International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Freeman, D. (1990). Intervening in practice teaching. In J. C. Richards, & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depth of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press. Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1992). What’s worth fighting for in your school?. New York: Teachers College Press. Harfitt, G. J. (2003). Raising classroom language awareness: A reflective practitioner. Paper presented at the First Asia TEFL International Conference, Busan, South Korea, 7–9 November 2003. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. London: Cassell. Hargreaves, A. (1997). From reform to renewal: A new deal for a new age. In A. Hargreaves, & R. Evans (Eds.), Beyond educational reform: Bringing teachers back in. Buckingham: Open University Press. Ingersoll, R. M., & Alsalam, N. (1997). Teacher professionalisation and teacher commitment: A multilevel analysis. Washington, DC: US Dept of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 366
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Teachers—Transforming their worlds and their work. New York: Teachers College Press. Loughran, J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33–43. Loughran, J., & Northfield, J. (1998). A framework for the development of self-study practice. In M. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self-study in teacher education. London: Falmer Press. Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Teachers’ workplace. New York: Longman. Scho¨n, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Basic Books. Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. New York: Peter Lang. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press. Tavares, N. J. (2004). Learning space—Uniting, motivating and empowering student teachers. In A. Pulverness (Ed.), IATEFL 2004 Liverpool conference selections. Kent: IATEFL. Paper presented at the 38th International IATEFL Conference in Liverpool, 13–17 April 2004. Tavares, N. J. (2005). Planning lessons with teachers: A dialogue, collaborative and reflective approach. Paper presented at the third Asia TEFL international conference, Beijing, China, 4–6 November 2005. Tsui, A. B. M. (2003). Understanding expertise in teaching: Case studies of ESL teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wajnryb, R. (1992). Classroom observation tasks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
International Journal of Educational Research 41 (2004) 353–366 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijedures
Chapter 5
Obstacles as opportunities in the promotion of teachers’ learning Gary James Harfitt, Nicole Judith Tavares Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong
Abstract This paper describes the professional growth of two teacher educators. It notes obstacles to teachers’ professional development, and investigates the factors which make some teachers less vulnerable to challenges. The paper observes that teacher educators who engage in self-study can reach a renewed understanding of their roles both in and beyond the classroom. The 3-year study on which the paper focuses aims at self-improvement, and takes the form of ongoing and reflective interaction with pre-service and in-service teachers in a post-graduate diploma course at The University of Hong Kong. Data were gathered from multiple sources: the collaborative lesson-planning experiences with the student–teachers, lesson observations, student–teachers’ post-lesson reflections, retrospective interviews, and various types of online communication. The paper explores what constitutes the inner power of student–teachers and how the teacher educators can play a more vital role in connecting the disconnected teachers by empowering them to turn obstacles into opportunities. Through the journey and dynamics of co-learning with the student–teachers and teachers at schools, the paper further discusses how these obstacles have become opportunities for the teacher educators’ mutual gains in professional growth and inner strength. r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Professional learning; Reflective teaching; Collegial support; Collaboration; Teacher change
Corresponding author. Fax: +852 28585649.
E-mail addresses: gharfi[email protected] (G.J. Harfitt), [email protected] (N.J. Tavares). 0883-0355/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2005.08.006
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
354
1. Introduction The dilemma facing the teacher below is at the heart of the examination of the inner lives of teachers in Hong Kong. It is largely representative of the voices of teachers in many other parts of the world. y I still think I tend to be teacher-dominated, and communicate with my students in the typical deductive manner of asking questions. But I am changing, and I want to continue to change in this way. Yet even as I say this, I am very aware that my teacher peers are there only to get students through the exams with the highest scores possible. Unfortunately, the system is in place. I know that if I advocate any change I will most likely lose my joby I feel very insecure in the tension that exists between what I am taught in the course and the reality of the teaching environment. What am I to do? I do plan to move ahead and try to apply what I am learning from the coursey But again, I have to follow the programme as dictated by the school; yet I do believe that I am creating a more positive ‘‘deep learning’’ environment for my Form 1 class and will continue to move in that direction with my Form 3 classyI am very pleased that they want to work with that approach more after the mid-term exams. It is a great challenge to think about how I will do that and still meet the requirements laid out in the ‘‘scheme of work Bible’’y I will try because I do not want to be mediocre. It is against my natural desire and training to be that wayy (Cary, an in-service teacher on a Postgraduate Diploma in Education course at The University of Hong Kong, December 2003). Here is an educator who is striving to become a better teacher. He is trying his best to overcome some of the limitations he has identified for himself, and find room to experiment with some of the ideas gleaned from his teacher education course. Yet he is faced with several obstacles—pressure from the school authority to adhere to the school syllabus, conflicting views towards teaching from his colleagues, and pragmatic concerns over job security. All these external or structural inhibitors and the psychological burden they impose on him clearly have a negative impact on his self-belief and sense of autonomy in the classroom. Despite the desire he expresses to overcome the tensions, the frustration he has to endure and opposing forces he has to combat is overwhelming. Awareness of such obstacles has prompted us, who are both teacher educators at The University of Hong Kong, to study the inner power that teachers like Cary have that make them feel empowered, amidst all the pressures, to ‘‘move ahead’’. This echoes Wajnryb’s belief (1992) that ‘teachers themselves are the primary initiators of their own development. The spirit of enquiry, the wish to reflect on one’s own teaching, perhaps to explore other paths, comes from within the practitioner; it cannot be imposed from outside’. It also reinforces Fullan’s (1993) observation that teachers cannot be given a purpose, because purposes must come from within. The work of Stigler underpins this, and in particular the assertion by Stigler and Hiebert (1999) that ‘teaching lies within the control of teachers. It is something that we can study and improve’. Yet for us, there is a fundamental need to go beyond simply
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
355
studying teachers to the study of their teaching context and to our own self-study—a need to deepen our understanding of the ‘why’ of their and our practice.
2. Learning through self-study 2.1. Why self-study We have both taught in mainstream secondary schools in Hong Kong for around a decade, served as heads of department in our schools for a significant period of our teaching, and made the transition from teaching at the secondary level to taking up teacher education courses at The University of Hong Kong. Since 2001, we have conducted over 500 school visits in our capacity as supervisors to our pre-service and in-service teachers during their teaching practicum. Through interaction with these student–teachers both in and out of class, through post-lesson conferences with them and reading their written reflections, through written exchanges with them via different forms of web-based communication, and through our critical review of their teaching experiences, questions have been raised which have serious implications not only for the teachers and their schools but equally for us as teacher educators who are dedicated to presenting ourselves as models of good teaching and to promoting teaching excellence in our courses. 2.2. Teacher educators as researchers It has been argued that student–teachers gain advantage from sharing the professional knowledge of experienced educators (Brown, McIntyre, & McAlpine, 1988). But does this suffice? Can student–teachers develop their own reflective and autonomous practice by depending solely on more experienced teachers or teacher educators? Our experience casts doubt on this, and leads us to challenge Caldwell’s (1997) argument that ‘experts’ from the university have a key role to play in the professional development of teachers within the school. When disseminating good practice in lectures and workshops, it is not uncommon for us to face resistance from student–teachers who might claim that the ideas discussed ‘‘wouldn’t work’’ in their schools. As teacher educators, we are convinced that we have a significant impact on our student–teachers’ learning, and can illuminate them on how the good practices we promote can work. Yet these perceived constraints and obstacles in their teaching contexts have often proven to be so powerful that they have evolved into underlying beliefs which we are convinced we have to overcome in order for professional development to occur. We therefore extend Fullan and Hargreaves’ (1992) proposition that improvements in quality of what goes on inside the classroom are highly dependent on improvements in what goes on outside it. Enlightened by these experiences, and informed by our analysis of their reflections, we have undertaken an in-depth process of self-study and improvement, with our initial focus placed on the study of the teachers’ lives. As teacher educators, we see
ARTICLE IN PRESS 356
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
these teachers’ obstacles as our obstacles; and these constraints become our constraints, which in turn create new challenges for us. We aspire to promote in our courses positive learning experiences for them. To achieve this, we feel we need to be critical of ourselves and our roles as researchers and teacher educators (Feldman, Paugh, & Mills, 2004). We ‘recognise the value of experience and reflection as contributors to the knowledge base of educators, which in turn, contributes to ‘‘ways of knowing’’’ (Brandenburg, 2005) which develop over time. We acknowledge the need to ‘take a research stance to our own teachingy to examine our own practice critically and systematically [so as to] understand better (our) own classroom’ (Stenhouse, 1975), through which we continually adapt, adjust and alter our practice as teacher educators ‘in response to the needs and concern of (our) students in their context’ (Loughran, 2002). We are convinced of the need to enter each teacher’s unique world of teaching and to make ourselves better ‘understanders’ (Freeman, 1990) of their specific context of work, to hear their voices of frustration, and to reflect on how we can play a more vital and supportive part in their professional development. This improvement-oriented journey into their lives, to deepen our understanding of our own roles and our professional as well as spiritual inquiry to explore pedagogies and structures which honour the inner-life dimension of the teachers and uncover it, forms the overarching focus of the paper. 2.3. Our research questions This study commenced with the following three research questions: (1) What are the obstacles perceived by local teachers in the classroom? (2) Why are some teachers more ready than others to overcome the obstacles and develop professionally? (3) What are the implications for the various stakeholders and how can we, as teacher educators, promote excellence in teaching amid the many constraints facing local teachers? These questions represent the starting point of an investigation of our student–teachers’ thoughts and practices. The reflective voices we gathered then served as an avenue through which we entered their inner lives, heightened our sensitivity to their needs, re-conceptualised our own teaching, reconstructed our ‘curriculum’ and moved towards developing ourselves into more effective teacher educators. For aspects which lie not so much within our control and with ‘what goes on outside’ the classroom, we hope to put forward recommendations to the parties concerned.
3. Recognising the obstacles faced by teachers in Hong Kong Participants of the study comprised 116 teachers from two cohorts of pre-service teachers and three cohorts of in-service teachers in our teacher education courses. To
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
357
address the first research question concerning the identification of perceived key obstacles to teachers’ professional development, an in-depth analysis of these student–teachers’ responses on their post-lesson reflection sheets was undertaken. The sheets focused on the limitations of the lessons and the teachers’ perceived gains in strength. They were completed within one week after lesson observations and supervisors’ evaluations of their teaching performance were conducted. Semistructured interviews based on the findings of the analysis were then held to furnish the study with more insight into how and why some teachers are more ready than others to overcome obstacles and develop professionally. Here we focus on a representative sample of student–teachers who demonstrated gains in inner strength to convince themselves that they could make a difference, on those who felt less vulnerable to obstacles, and on those who felt less paralysed when confronted with challenges (Fig. 1). Part of the post-lesson reflection sheet required teachers to name three main challenges that they faced in their teaching. From this, we were able to identify 183 and 365 references made to obstacles by the pre-service and in-service teachers respectively. These references were then coded, categorised, ranked and presented in Fig. 2. Many of the constraints that the student–teachers cited were structural and institutional—as denoted by the many references made to lack of time in completing sections of the textbook, finishing the syllabus and preparing students for assessment. These are clearly considered to be huge barriers for both groups, and translated into pressure, as Michelle an in-service teacher remarked: y constraints include the time available, the number of assessments, management’s priorities, e.g. accountability etcyDue to the tight teaching scheduleyI had no choice but to try and fit in as much as possible. In fact frustration normally does not arise from the lack of new ideas or ways to enhance students’ learning but the reality that there is little time to explore and to experiment in the classroom. Like most teachers in Hong Kong, I spend most of my time trying to get through the syllabus and preparing students for assessments. The frustration, as this teacher vividly depicts, stems from a number of external factors, ranging from the school syllabus and both school-based and public 2 Pre-service and 3 In-service Cohorts (n=154) 2003 – 2004 (pre-service full-time cohort)
n = 26
2002 – 2003 (pre-service full-time cohort)
n = 35
2003 – 2005 (in-service part-time cohort)
n = 28
2002 – 2004 (in-service part-time cohort)
n = 43
2001 – 2003 (in-service part-time cohort)
n = 22
Fig. 1. Distribution of post-lesson reflections received.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 358
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
% of responses of… Obstacles
Pre-service Teachers
In-service Teachers
Over-planning and time constraints
25.7%
10.4%
Interaction in the classroom
13.1%
10.4%
Giving instructions
8.7%
Being a strong leader / Empowerment
8.2%
Assigning roles / Grouping students
9.9%
Designing appropriate materials
9.3%
Involving all students in the lesson
7.9%
Dealing with less-able students
7.4%
Fig. 2. Summary of the major obstacles identified from teachers’ post-lesson reflection sheets.
assessment systems to expectations of heads of department, students, parents and other stakeholders. These constraints, which are often seen as being outside the control of teachers who do not occupy senior positions in their schools, have been well-documented (see, e.g. Ingersoll & Alsalam, 1997). Although a description of local obstacles and constraints may contribute to existing literature, it is perhaps more important to acknowledge how these forces have all added up to form mental inhibitions that make some teachers feel powerless and demoralised while others see this as a platform upon which they reflect, re-conceptualise and react in a positive and professional manner. Herein lies the crux. Indeed, teachers do have a ‘‘choice’’; and this is what Michelle came to realise in one of her later reflections: one should never dwell on the negatives but try to work as best as possible within the constraints in the context. We maintain that our student–teachers can be professionals like Michelle. We were eager to challenge ourselves to explore what we could do in our capacity as teacher educators in moving beyond expertise in our own teaching and disciplinary knowledge. We desired greater expertise in supervision of our student–teachers to help the ‘disconnected’ ones (Palmer, 1998) who feel that they lack sufficient empowerment and autonomy in the classroom to turn their obstacles into opportunities.
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
359
The teacher’s workplace presents us with a very different challenge to the psychological and structural obstacles faced by individual teachers highlighted earlier. From our study, while it was encouraging to see all our student–teachers attributing their gains in strength to the modelling of good practices by their university tutors and our pre-service cohorts to the mentoring environment at school, we were disappointed with the low ranking of the in-service cohorts’ citing of examples of collegial and mentoring support within their workplace (Fig. 3). This has aroused our concern not only for the devastating impact of the main structural inhibitor ‘time’ but also for the deprivation of autonomy they experience at school. The fact that the in-service teachers value feedback and are appreciative of as well as open to external support and assistance suggests the potentially positive influence of professional collaboration which is nonetheless insufficient in their own teaching context. This is exemplified in a revealing quote from another teacher Annie: It appears that the school has its existing system. Teachers often have to follow the set of rules and do whatever the school has offered. As a new teacher, it would seem inappropriate if you bring your ‘concern’ forward when no similar premise has been shared by other experienced teachers. Therefore it is even harder for new teachers to bring new ideas in. The fact that teachers like Annie face institutional barriers in the shape of their professional workplace creates a very different challenge for us. Teacher
References made and ranking order What / How have I improved?
My sensitivity and self-awareness in class
Pre-service Teachers (n=87)
In-service Teachers (n=163)
7 (6)
21 (1)
13 (2)
5 (11)
My tutor (HKU) has helped me a lot
9 (5)
16 (3)
My mentor has helped me learn a lot
9 (3)
Designing my own materials
My colleagues have helped me learn a lot
3 (16)
My planning is improving
4 (10)
12 (7)
Designing my own activities
15 (1)
9 (8)
Fig. 3. Areas in which the pre-service and in-service cohorts have identified to be gains in strength.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 360
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
empowerment should be brought to the fore. Instead of ignoring the professionalism of teachers, schools need to recognise that teachers, both novice and experienced, are assets and can contribute their expertise to staff development. The implications of this will be addressed in Section 4 of this paper. As teacher educators, we believe that we have designed a teacher education course that serves as a cognitive apprenticeship for our student–teachers to equip them with the necessary knowledge, skills and attitudes to meet the needs of the secondary school system in Hong Kong. Yet the findings have urged us to further address Cary’s question ‘‘What am I to do?’’ and inculcate a spirit of professional development in them so that they feel empowered like Michelle to critically reflect, analyse and positively modify their approaches when faced with external obstacles. Cary’s question also represents our question. The self-study and constant pursuit of ways of maximising the inner power of our student–teachers has not only reshaped our understanding of what it means to be a teacher educator but also provided us with opportunities to challenge our taken-for-granted assumptions and enhance our reflective practice. This will be examined in Section 5 of the paper.
4. Seeing obstacles as opportunities for learning In this part, the second and third research questions listed above will be addressed in order to illuminate how some teachers from this study have shown a willingness and ability to understand and overcome their constraints, both structural and institutional. By examining how our student–teachers have made strategic choices to counter their constraints, we have been able to expand our own knowledge base as teacher educators. Therefore, the final part of this paper focuses on how transformation has occurred within us, leading to sharpened awareness in our teaching and learning. 4.1. The teacher’s readiness to change and use of compensation strategies One of the most outstanding qualities discovered in the student–teachers, who displayed sensitivity towards the obstacles facing them, was their awareness of their own progress, their readiness to accept their existing limitations, their strong urge to improve, their dedication to extending their competence, their openness to positive change and, above all, their vocational vitality to transform hurdles into opportunities. In the interviews and in their reflections, they made frequent reference to ‘determination’, ‘perseverance’, ‘confidence’ and ‘flexibility’ in adapting to changes in their teaching contexts. A further aspect which distinguishes them from the average teacher was their courage to outlive their localised constraints as well as ability to make a difference in their effective deployment of compensation strategies (which should be seen in a positive light, unlike avoidance strategies which tend to stress the negative in teaching and learning). Claire, an in-service teacher, is a typical example of one who takes the initiative to create opportunities for herself to develop professionally and
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
361
overcomes the ‘time’ constraint that many perceive to be insurmountable through peer collaboration: At times, I ask my mentor and colleagues for advice, and they are always willing to help me improve. This academic year, all the Form 1 English teachers have worked very closely together and I sometimes get inspirations from them to experiment with new teaching ideasy After lessons, I often spend time reflecting on my teachingy My colleagues and I have evaluations of our lessons every now and then. And we strive for improvement in our teaching objectives, resources and strategiesy This reinforces Eraut’s observation (1994) of the need for more ‘regular reflection, self-evaluation and a disposition to learn from colleagues’ in developing professional expertise, and extends Wajnryb’s notion (1992) that teachers themselves are at the heart of the solution. For us then, as teacher educators, the challenge is how we can bring out these inner strengths in our student–teachers and create opportunities for those who are already empowered to cast a positive impact on their counterparts. 4.2. Bridging the teaching and learning gap The ample references our student–teachers have made to teachers—their university tutors and mentors—who have had positive influences on their teaching have once again reassured us of the visual impact expert teachers have in providing models of successful teaching that serve as scaffolding for teachers in attaining a greater degree of competence (Berliner, 1992, 1995). They have also reinforced our belief that we have a major impact on their pedagogical as well as professional growth. Nevertheless, we see ourselves as more than role models of exemplary practices in the classroom. We share Loughran and Northfield’s view (1998) that it is vital for the teacher educator’s teaching practice to be congruent with the expectations of our student–teachers’ developing practice and thus constantly challenge ourselves to reflect on the effectiveness of our own teaching and to make this reflective process public. We value not only the feedback we receive but also the interactive opportunities in which we engage our student–teachers, through which they experience how we set the stage for the teachers to rationalise their teaching decisions. More importantly, the occasions help them to ‘visualise’ how we make their positive and negative voices heard and respond to them in the most professional manner both in the session and in subsequent lessons through relative adjustments in accordance with their expressed needs. In sum, we aim to get our student–teachers to ‘feel’ our inner strength to advance in our teaching expertise and our dedication to critical inquiry of our own professional practice. To further create a temperament oriented to inquiry and a disposition towards investigating their own practice, we attach great importance to their teaching practicum experience. The developmental nature of the pre-lesson experience is amplified by creating opportunities for the student–teachers to take part in collaborative lesson-planning processes with their peers and teaching partners as
ARTICLE IN PRESS 362
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
‘critical friends’, mentors, university tutors and supervisors in micro-teaching and self-directed learning sessions at university-based classes, in school attachment schemes and through computer-mediated forms of communication. In line with Vygotskian theories that knowledge is constructed through dialogue and ‘situated’ in the settings of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991), we are convinced that such pre-lesson interactive discourse in the collaborative process adds to the impact of post-lesson conferences and urges students to problematise their established routines (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Tsui, 2003), and challenge their previously held beliefs. The arrangements can also help student teachers to see the ‘situated possibilities’ (Benner, Tanner, & Chesla, 1996) that they would otherwise not have seen, through which their competence will be stretched and reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action (Scho¨n, 1983) enhanced. The teachers may also become more ready to adopt an enquiry approach (Tavares, 2005), like Kathleen who reflected on her experience as follows: It was enlightening to get another person’s perspective on my lesson because that is not a luxury that I have at my ready disposal in school. The experience has shown me the importance of sharing my lesson plans with my colleagues, and the benefits of co-designing with teachers who are teaching similar classes. This reflective climate is reinforced in pre- and post-practicum sessions though different mechanisms. Lesson study and course development assessment tasks are designed to facilitate students in looking inwards to question and reconceptualise their own teaching though an in-depth, objective and critical analysis of a selected lesson by our pre-service teachers and of a series of lessons through a process of collective inquiry by the in-service teachers. Beyond class time, between sessions and during the teaching practicum, they are encouraged to continue to see each other as members of a community of practice through participation in online learning platforms, where the teacher educator plays the role of participant, mediator, catalyst and devil’s advocate to engage student–teachers in constructivist conversation, to facilitate peer support and collaboration as they function as inquirers and co-thinkers in exploring alternatives to teaching pedagogies in the face of obstacles and to promote their openness to positive change (Tavares, 2004). Having experienced the power of collaboration, the impact of collective inquiry and the significance of ongoing professional learning, it is our intention that the teachers sustain this spirit of reflection and extend this community of practice to their own workplace. 4.3. Overcoming institutional obstacles—working with schools to professionalise teachers If we want to bridge the teaching and learning gap, we also have to recognise the power that is within each school to promote professional growth in its teachers. This brings us back to Hargreaves’ belief (1997) that teachers’ professional growth is best
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
363
fostered in supportive and collaborative communities of practice with a shared vision if they can develop together with collegial support (Fullan & Hargreaves, 1992; Rosenholtz, 1989). It is also related to Stigler and Hiebert’s argument (1999) that pre-service education, ‘no matter how effective, cannot by itself produce continuous improvement. Continuous improvement requires ongoing opportunities to learn and improve while teaching.’ The concept of reculturing presented by Fullan (1993) and Hargreaves (1994) is relevant here. We speak from experience that staff development in Hong Kong schools is often hindered by the notion of ‘face’ and the fear of ‘hierarchy’ prevalent in the deeply rooted collective Confucian culture. Teachers new to the profession thus tend to regard colleagues in the senior management as authority figures, their heads of department as the main sources of wisdom, the more experienced as ‘Mr and Miss know-alls’, native-speaking English teachers as language ‘experts’, invited speakers from tertiary institutions and external bodies as ‘educational experts’, and themselves as inferior in all aspects. Yet there is no real evidence that teachers develop through such hierarchical systems and improve through the judgments and comments of others, particularly in in-service settings (Cosh, 1998). So in order for genuine staff development to exist, professional development to sustain on an ongoing and continuous basis and a true spirit of collaboration and collective inquiry to be cultivated, there may be a need to deritualise the more conventional approaches to staff development. To recognise teachers’ expertise in and understanding of their unique teaching contexts, we hope to urge school management to place greater trust in teachers. Management can also consider empowering teachers by moving them to the centre stage to play a more leading role in shaping staff development programmes, and devising tailor-made tasks that better address their needs. Lesson study workshops could be a possible start in such programmes to engage teachers in working collaboratively in promoting ‘continuous inquiry into practice’ through beginning to openly discuss and question their own instructional methods, thereby ‘promoting growth in practice’ (Lieberman & Miller, 1999). All this would then serve to not only enrich and sustain the spirit of reflection advocated by Scho¨n (1983) but also take the processes of collaborative lesson-planning, peer observation, lesson study and joint pursuit of knowledge even further so that they are no longer seen as a ‘‘luxury’’ rarely practised in schools. At the community level, it is imperative that mentoring is no longer solely perceived as a school–university partnership initiative to support novice teachers in their initial teacher development. Through disseminating good practices to schools in our capacity as invited speakers of both school-based and territory-wide staff development seminars, we hope to make schools aware that both beginning and experienced teachers can benefit from mentorship in different forms and at different stages of their teaching career. We advocate a system ‘devoid of hierarchy’ (Dantonio, 1995) where all teachers can be mentors to less experienced colleagues in a specific discipline and at the same time mentees of other colleagues and are engaged in a readily available learning network for mutual interdependence. Within such an environment, teachers will feel less inhibited to take part in an open and professional
ARTICLE IN PRESS 364
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
dialogue, engage in some form of joint inquiry about their teaching practices, discuss new strategies and explore new initiatives and experiment with them, pool resources and enhance their pedagogical expertise. Peer observation schemes could also be seen to be complementary to the co-learning environment with the focus shifted from formal appraisal to a more meaningful form of co-learning dialogue (Harfitt, 2003). This would enable teachers to ‘‘enjoy’’ peer observation just as much as Andrea does. I enjoy the process of observing my colleague’s class and being observed by her. I have gained a lot from it. Being an observer, I reflect on my own teaching. Being an observee, I enjoy my peer and supervisor giving me objective and constructive feedback. During the post-lesson sharing session, I develop a deeper understanding on my strengths and weaknesses.
5. Our growth as teacher educators In this paper, we have described how we have embraced learning through a reflective process of the study of the professional growth of our student–teachers as part of our study of ourselves. This self-study has not only highlighted the importance of constant (re-)evaluation of our pedagogies and reinforced our commitment to best practice but also reshaped our understanding of what inhibits teachers’ professional development. This reframing has encouraged us to be more critical in examining our own roles as teacher educators, in challenging the taken for granted, in problematising and reconceptualising our teaching and in arriving at renewed understanding of our own classrooms. We now create more space in our course for our student–teachers to articulate and reflect on the challenges and constraints they face; we structure our lessons around their ‘obstacles’ and help them see how this explicit recognition of their ‘obstacles’ can become ‘opportunities’ for our greater responsiveness to their needs, more effective teaching on our part and enhanced professional growth for both. We are also dedicated to building ‘a framework of support’ (Brandenburg, 2005), to engaging with student–teachers in ongoing reflective and interactive discourse and to challenging our ways of being a teacher educator (Feldman et al., 2004) as we share the same purpose—co-learning— and see our inner strength to improve with them. We maintain that, with the continuous support of the school which is the learning community in their closest proximity, teachers can unleash their inner power and stretch their teaching competence. Understanding the inner power of our student–teachers and their individual contexts is fundamental to our own development as teacher educators and this is an ongoing process which reminds us that ‘change is a journey, not a blueprint’ (Fullan, 1993). This takes us back to the start of the paper when one teacher revealed his frustrations, desire and inner strength to address the questions of ‘‘What am I to do?’’ so as to ‘‘move ahead’’. Two years later, alongside our constant pursuit of ways of developing our teaching excellence and establishing of an environment for collaborative renewal, this teacher
ARTICLE IN PRESS G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
365
graduated from the course with a testimony of his personal growth and increased inner power. I really appreciated being able to explain in detail my fears about moving into ‘uncharted areas’ of teachingy I was prepared emotionally for this and ‘made the jump’y It has been quite a journey and I no longer find the commitment to grow, change and keep improving as a teacher a threatyI will continue to grow and am confident that I can become an evermore effective teacher as I continue to sharpen and utilise the skills I have learned from (the course)y (Cary, March 2005)
References Benner, P., Tanner, C. A., & Chesla, C. A. (1996). Expertise in nursing practice: Caring, clinical judgment and ethics. New York: Springer Publishing Company. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves—An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Illinois: Open Court. Berliner, D. C. (1992). The nature of expertise in teaching. In F. K. Oser, A. Dick, & J. L. Patry (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching: The new synthesis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Berliner, D. C. (1995). The development of pedagogical expertise. In P. K. Siu, & P. T. K. Tam (Eds.), Quality in education: Insights from different perspectives. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Research Association. Brandenburg, R. (2005). Self-study as a means of understanding and embracing the complexities of (re)learning as a teacher educator. Paper presented at the 12th ISATT International Conference, 3–6 July, Sydney, New South Wales. Brown, S., McIntyre, D., & McAlpine, A. (1988). The knowledge which underpins the craft of teaching. Edinburgh: Scottish Council for Research in Education. Caldwell, B. J. (1997). The impact of self-management and self-government on professional cultures of teaching: A strategic analysis for the twenty-first century. In A. Hargreaves, & R. Evans (Eds.), Beyond educational reform: Bringing teachers back in. Buckingham: Open University Press. Cosh, J. (1998). Peer observations in higher education—A reflective approach. Innovations in Education and Training International, May 1998, 35(2), 171–176. Dantonio, M. (1995). Collegial coaching: Inquiry into the teaching self. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: The Falmer Press. Feldman, A., Paugh, P., & Mills, G. (2004). Self-study through action research. In International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Freeman, D. (1990). Intervening in practice teaching. In J. C. Richards, & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depth of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press. Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (1992). What’s worth fighting for in your school?. New York: Teachers College Press. Harfitt, G. J. (2003). Raising classroom language awareness: A reflective practitioner. Paper presented at the First Asia TEFL International Conference, Busan, South Korea, 7–9 November 2003. Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. London: Cassell. Hargreaves, A. (1997). From reform to renewal: A new deal for a new age. In A. Hargreaves, & R. Evans (Eds.), Beyond educational reform: Bringing teachers back in. Buckingham: Open University Press. Ingersoll, R. M., & Alsalam, N. (1997). Teacher professionalisation and teacher commitment: A multilevel analysis. Washington, DC: US Dept of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
ARTICLE IN PRESS 366
G.J. Harfitt, N.J. Tavares / Int. J. Educ. Res. 41 (2004) 353–366
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Teachers—Transforming their worlds and their work. New York: Teachers College Press. Loughran, J. (2002). Effective reflective practice: In search of meaning in learning about teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33–43. Loughran, J., & Northfield, J. (1998). A framework for the development of self-study practice. In M. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self-study in teacher education. London: Falmer Press. Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Teachers’ workplace. New York: Longman. Scho¨n, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Basic Books. Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. New York: Peter Lang. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education in the classroom. New York: Free Press. Tavares, N. J. (2004). Learning space—Uniting, motivating and empowering student teachers. In A. Pulverness (Ed.), IATEFL 2004 Liverpool conference selections. Kent: IATEFL. Paper presented at the 38th International IATEFL Conference in Liverpool, 13–17 April 2004. Tavares, N. J. (2005). Planning lessons with teachers: A dialogue, collaborative and reflective approach. Paper presented at the third Asia TEFL international conference, Beijing, China, 4–6 November 2005. Tsui, A. B. M. (2003). Understanding expertise in teaching: Case studies of ESL teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wajnryb, R. (1992). Classroom observation tasks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.