The CoP was created by a professor who majored in sport pedagogy and PE teachers. One interesting part is that the professor had two types of roles in the CoP: 1) an advisor and 2) the actual leader. In this section, both roles and its impacts on teachers’ professional learning are reported.
1) An advisor
Like any other organizations or communities, necessary regulations to manage the CoP were made when it was created. In terms of members’ positions and roles, teachers and the professor decided that the professor took a role of ‘an advisor’ and an elected teacher took ‘a two-year term president’8. Therefore, the professor had been working as an advisor and Steve had been working as the sixth president since 2014.
As an advisor, the professor provided teachers with a range of support. Firstly, he had offered members teaching ideas or information.
Firstly, I offer a direction. I lead them as a mentor or a coach. I encourage them, I advise them. I develop and share teaching ideas such as, idea A, B and C for their professional development (the professor, Interview 4).
He is always making an effort to improve PE and he involves us in this process, which instigates our thoughts on improving PE too. With this, he creates an atmosphere to constantly strive for the better (Peter, Interview 6).
Secondly, similar to offering teaching ideas above, the professor helped teachers to have opportunities to introduce or present their pedagogies or to be involved with other types of professional development such as writing PE text books. As a result, some teachers could
develop reputations in the field of PE and some of them could make appearances on TV.
Furthermore, I offer them opportunities outside within the wider community of PE. For example, I recommend them to events and organizations to give a presentation on the X teaching model, which provides them the opportunity to signify their roles within CoP. (the professor, Interview 4).
He gave us (including John) many opportunities to introduce our pedagogies in many workshops. We were lucky. Through engagement in the activities, I could get confidence, courage or responsibility during that time … so we could make appearances on TV (Peter, Interview 1).
Lastly, the professor set a good example for teachers. Teachers thought that the professor’s character and his ways of interacting with them influenced their willingness to engage in the CoP and professional learning.
John: He lives by his teachings. The philosophical theory that he pursues is demonstrated in his PE classes and furthermore in his daily life. Through this we naturally put our confidence and trust in him to learn from. The changes that occur within us through his teachings are a first-hand experience to “good” teaching that we as teachers all pursue. In other words it is the kind of “good” teaching that we hope to demonstrate to our own pupils.
Peter: He always has done and still sets a good example through his continued interest and efforts in developing PE and CoP. He is dedicated to the work but also to us. His interest and consideration to us shows through his praise and reprimands but also through his ability to assess what we need and provide accordingly. It almost feels that CoP exists for us because of such genuine support. He certainly is different from other Professors that I know (Teachers Focus Group).
2) The actual leader
However, the role of the professor was not restricted to being an advisor. There was a tendency for the case-study teachers to regard respectively the professor as ‘the actual leader’ and the
president (Steve) as ‘a staff’ who conducted faithfully the professor’s directions.
The professor despite his title as an advisor acts as the president of the CoP. There is a teacher assigned as the president. But perhaps the teacher president does not live up to his expectations because he is very involved just like as if he is the president (Henry, Interview 3).
His influence is immeasurable because he is the creator of the CoP. He has the supreme power (laugh). I think that having a creator as a leader is rather special. The respect the teachers have for him forges a relationship, where by the teachers respond to his every word even when they are really busy. So his role is very important (Steve, Interview 4).
Peter thought that the role as the actual leader had positive impacts on intimacy between members and continuance of the CoP.
Anyway our goal is the same thing. We have a climate that he is the developer of the X teaching model and we are teachers to practice the model in schools, so we think he is the person we need to respect something like that, it is natural. The reason for his position is an advisor is that because there was not appropriate position for him, he said like ‘I’ll take an advisor, it would be better to step back’. His intention was helping us from behind this CoP. But actually he gives us powerful advice whenever we need to decide something to do and we accept his advice without questions, so (his roles are) beyond just an advisor (laugh). But you know he is more enthusiastic to this CoP than us … He is like a head of a control tower. Because he has worked as the pivot of this CoP, so we could have been more connected, more gluey. If he has not been doing like this this CoP would be collapsed, this is a big thing (Peter, Interview 3).
Along with the actual leader’s positive influence reported above, however, some of the teachers viewed it differently. For example, this relationship between teachers and the professor influenced on the ways of communications in the CoP. Judy thought that the ways in which the CoP selects the main themes and activities for professional development were mainly decided by the professor.
Unlike other teacher learning communities we have a professor leading us in the CoP. I think that this makes a big difference. For example, of course we bring our teaching strategies and some thoughts about teaching to the meetings, but main themes of the meetings are led by his directions and instructions. So I think his existence influences and determines the interactions in the CoP (Judy, Interview 4).
Under these circumstances, some teachers regarded his leadings or directions as burdens.
To me, the professor as an advisor is just a mere title because I don’t think much has changed in terms of his participation. I mean, he still assigns a lot of work (laugh). I feel the pressure to complete all the assignments but it is not like I get kicked out of CoP by not doing the assignment (laugh). Nevertheless, I do feel obliged to do the assignment (Henry, Interview 3).
The professor always pushes us to be better. He guides us to reach our fullest potential. However, I know that he wants us to motivate ourselves and be proactive in reaching our fullest potential (Kimberly, Interview 2).
In line with this issue, Judy recognized the necessity of teachers’ autonomy for more productive professional learning in the CoP meetings. Further, in order to do this, she made a suggestion that the professor needs to put his role as only an advisor.
Judy: Most works in this CoP have been done in a way like this. The professor brought a content or theme so that some kinds of works are needed to conduct the theme, the president then simply handles them in the meetings and teachers need to collect some data.
Researcher: It sounds the president (Steve) is a kind of a staff or a manager.
Judy: Yes, a staff (laugh) ... so many themes in the meetings were already decided by the professor. I think we need to focus more on sharing our teaching experiences. We need to bring our pedagogies and discuss them. Therefore, in order to make the meetings helpful (to developing our pedagogies), he (the professor) needs to get step back little bit (laugh). Because his influences are huge in this CoP. His role is a president or a CEO instead of an advisor at the moment (Interview 3).
In summary, the professor worked as not only an advisor who gave teachers advice but also the actual leader who actively managed activities in the CoP. Although his role as the actual leader could have positive impacts, it also might inhibits teachers’ autonomous professional learning.