However we view teaching and teachers, in most contexts we can see teacher preparation as comprising two phases: the initial or pre-service stage and an in-service stage (though in some contexts nothing much may happen in that stage) and although I am mostly concerned with the latter stage, it is nonetheless useful to briefly review some aspects of the initial stage; particularly since dissatisfaction with the results of
many initial teacher education programmes encouraged a keener examination of the whole process of teacher education at all stages and levels.
A key distinction which appears in the literature is whether we conceive of teacher education as being essentially one of ‘training’ where teachers need to acquire a body of knowledge, skills, and strategies that somehow are deemed to be the essential and sufficient qualifications for the profession of teaching, or whether we view teaching and teacher education as a long term endeavour which takes on board the need for teachers to be constantly learning and changing in response to the rapidly developing society around them. Where teaching was viewed as a relatively static activity, and teacher education seen mainly as ‘training’ then initial education was designed primarily so that teachers could gain knowledge of the subject they were to teach and be acculturated into the existing culture of education which of courses varied from country to country. Initial teacher training (ITT), as it is still commonly referred to, also acts as a ‘gatekeeper’ to the profession though in contexts where there is no initial teacher preparation of any kind then generally the gate keeping is based on appropriate educational qualifications.
There is in fact no general agreement that teachers need the kind of formal programmes of pre-service or initial teacher education that exists in many countries today, and that is especially true for the preparation for secondary level teachers where subject specialist knowledge may be regarded as more important than pedagogical knowledge. There is, however, widespread variability through the world and it is important not to assume that the kinds of patterns of teacher education that predominate, in say the U.S. and the U.K., are those commonly found throughout the
world. In many contexts, economic and developmental needs shape the way teachers are ‘trained’ more than any underlying philosophy of teacher education. However, most seem to now agree that in an ideal world, teachers need to be well educated, preferably to degree level, but as to whether they should then receive specialist training before starting to teach or whether that training should be a well designed, well supported in-service ‘apprenticeship’ programme remains contentious.
3.2.1. Apprenticeship models of initial teacher education
A view of teaching as an activity for which one could be ‘trained’ underlay many initial programmes whose structure is often referred to as the ‘apprenticeship’ model of teacher education. This model is often contrasted with other models of teacher education such as ‘the craft model’ or the ‘reflective model’ to which I refer later. The term perhaps was loosely based on an early 19th century model in the U.K. (and elsewhere) where it was assumed that teaching skills and knowledge about teaching were best acquired through a ‘learning on the job’ approach assisted by a more experienced and capable practitioner. The early versions of this approach in the U.K. were by no means akin to a true apprenticeship in that there was no ‘quality’ control of the ‘apprentice master or mistress’ and in most cases the young teacher was merely left to sink or swim. Nevertheless, regardless of titles, the apprenticeship model places a high premium on a ‘teaching practicum’ where one learns to teach partly by trying it out oneself and partly by observing others teach and imitating them. This approach has been widely criticised (see for example Wallace, 1991; Richards and Farell, 2005) because it merely preserves what might be ineffective teaching methods with teachers becoming mere imitators. However, as Hagger and McIntyre (2006) point out apprenticeship models are “based on respect for, and reliance on, the expertise of
practising teachers”. They show that whilst for most of the 20thcentury this expertise was largely ignored as pre-service training moved into higher education institutions, now at the start of the 21stcentury, there is a growing recognition that Initial Teacher Education (ITE) “needs to draw strongly and effectively upon the expertise of practising teachers”. Hagger and McIntyre (2006) are recommending that ITE needs to be more school based with practising teachers at the heart of any initial teacher education programme practice although they are not recommending a return to the concept of a fixed and immutable method of teaching which all teachers must follow.
3.2.2. A scientific-technical approach to teacher education
In many countries the 20thcentury saw a move away from apprenticeship models to a model based on the notion that what was important in teaching was subject knowledge and that teaching skills could be isolated, justified, theorised, and taught outside of a classroom. In particular, evidence through the use of research, could be used to justify particular pedagogies. Thus ITE moved into the arena of higher education and particularly to universities. The situation was of course more complex than that; for example, one reason for demanding a graduate teaching profession in many contexts was to do with raising the status and hence pay of teachers. That aside, teacher educators based in establishments of higher education sought to develop a theorised understanding of teaching but the problem was that once the young teacher went into schools they found the theory into practice approach problematic. At their college, they might well have explored scholarly understandings of say ‘discipline’ but felt very unprepared for the reality of an undisciplined classroom.
which teachers could be ‘trained’ and that perhaps some further updating might be required later in their careers, but essentially once they were ensconced in schools, little real thought was given to any future professional development. In language teacher education too, training is seen as a way “to introduce the methodological choices available and to familiarise trainees with the range of terms and concepts that are the ‘common currency’ of language teachers”. (Mann, 2005:104). Thus, it can be said that training is concerned with the development of competence in a limited set of skills, behaviours, and habits of mind pertaining to a specific task or function. What has come to be questioned is not so much whether such training was desirable or not, but rather was it transferrable and applicable to real teaching practice after training? Clearly there are skills and competencies which teachers need to possess, but how they best come to acquire them and how they implement new skills obtained in training once they are in post became of critical concern given the rapidly changing nature of society and education systems.
3.2.3. A paradigm shift
JoAnn Crandall, in a review article in 2000 looks at changes in approach to language teacher education specifically and points to the major changes in our conceptualisation of both what it means to be a teacher, ‘teacher as person’, and what the process of teaching entails, ‘teaching as process’. These changes have affected not only the shape and structure of initial teaching programmes but more importantly affected the role of in-service education which has now come to play a very dominant role in the education of teachers, normally now referred to as continuing professional development or CPD. These changes also mean that teacher education is now a process which is continuous. It is no longer a matter of being ‘trained’ on a course before entering schools but rather
of engaging in a lifelong process of professional development. Thus, today’s pre-service education still retains its function as a gatekeeper to the profession but is seen now as very much a first step with a focus on developing reflective teachers through close association with schools (the ways in which this is done falls outside the scope of this literature review). But the major change has been in the role and shape of what was previously referred to as in-service education, now commonly referred to as continuing professional development. More detailed definitions and characteristics of CPD and INSET will be described in section 3.3.
In particular this shift recognised the importance of change as a dominant force in all teachers‘ careers and so an understanding of change and innovation as a process and its implications for education, led to key educational research in this area (e.g. Fullan and Hargreaves, 1992; Guskey, 2002)
Crandall points to two major ‘shifts’ which have had a major impact on approaches to teacher education. Firstly, there is the shift from a transmission, product-oriented view of teaching to a constructivist view where teachers and their pupils are seen as active constructors of their own understandings, rather than theory informing practice; it is now teachers themselves through an informed consideration of their own teaching who inform theory. Thus teachers need to ‘reflect’ throughout their careers and become ‘reflective practitioners’ using Schön’s terms developing their own understanding of teaching and learning and refining their own practice. This reflective approach emphasises the role that the teacher plays in generating knowledge through teaching experience and reflection – conscious recollection and evaluation of that experience (Crandall, 2000).
‘Reflection’ is viewed as the process of critical examination of experiences through such procedures as self-monitoring, observation, and case studies (Richards and Farrell, 2005). This view of learning is, therefore, based on the assumption that teachers learn from experience through focused reflection on the nature and meaning of teaching experiences (Schön, 1991; Wallace, 1991; Richards and Lockhart, 1994). This broadly corresponds to the so-called ‘interpretivist’ view identified by Freeman (1991), which emphasises why (emphasis added) teachers do what (emphasis added) they do in different contexts, encouraging the addition of reflection and the development of frameworks of interpretation to theory and skill development in teacher education. The question of ‘what’ and ‘why’ enables teachers to control exercise and open up the possibility of transforming their everyday classroom life through reflection (Bartlett, 1990). Allied to this is the recognition that if learning is essentially a social act then teacher education will need to become more collaborative in nature, both at pre- service and INSET stages.
Secondly, it is now widely recognised that any teacher education programme must engage more fully with the different contexts of learning; the most effective professional preparation must involve ‘on the job’ learning with schools being transformed into communities of learning and inquiry. This also points to the sociocultural nature of teaching and learning and suggests that there is unlikely to be one ‘best practice’ for all contexts (Holliday, 1994).
3.3. Continuing professional development (CPD) and INSET: definitions and