Two intertwined themes are evident in the literature examined around this topic. On the one hand there is an acceptance that the role of the teacher as the initiator and controller of their professional development is crucial to sustained pedagogical change. On the other hand there is an acceptance that the outcome of any professional development of teachers is that students learn and develop in meaningful and developmentally appropriate ways.
In early research on teacher change, Michael Huberman (1992) recommends teacher experimentation (research) because he believes that the ‘artisan model’ that many teachers adopt in their classroom makes it hard for them to change their practice. He describes the artisan model as one of teachers working alone in
developed over a long period of isolation. His recommendations for overcoming the negative features of the artisan model include increasing the quantity and quality of peers with whom staff interact, decentralising the resources available for professional development to schools or groups of schools, facilitating quality leadership in the schools and encouraging teachers to experiment in the classroom by collecting data, over time, and analysing it (Huberman, 1992). Such a teacher research strategy would also allow for dissemination of results and findings as the classroom results would be shared with groups of interacting and collaborating peers. As will be seen in the following paragraphs, several other writers and researchers in the field have concurred with Huberman’s model.
Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002), having considered the linear model of professional development, as outlined earlier in this section, found it to be insufficient to explain teacher change. Further they had, in an earlier paper, raised the idea that change had multiple perspectives and had listed them. The perspective that they chose as best fitting the current focus in professional development was “change as growth or learning” (p.948). From their research and thinking around teacher change, they have developed a model of teacher change which has four domains (personal, practice, consequence and external) and mediating influences of reflection and enaction. These mediating influences are the mechanisms whereby change in one domain leads to change in another domain.
The model developed by Clarke and Hollingsworth introduced the important notion of interconnected factors in teacher change, acknowledging that change does not come about in isolation or in a predetermined manner. Rather, teacher change is complex, contextual, personal and diverse. Placing the teacher at the heart of teacher change and allowing them to direct their own development is a method favoured by other researchers.
Because of their concerns that traditional research is not often adopted into practice by teachers, Burbank and Kanchak (2003) propose a teacher researcher approach. They believe that there are three essential characteristics of effective teacher professional development: teachers need to be critical consumers of
research, they should be participants in research discussions, and should also be developers of research-based approaches to classroom decision making (Burbank & Kauchak, 2003). In their papers these authors promote collaborative action research between pre-service teachers and teachers in the classroom.
However, in the results of their study it appears that the differing priorities of student teachers and classroom teachers led to difficulties in implementing such a collaborative approach. If one were to contemplate implementing such collaboration, one would need to examine the individual needs of each partner to ensure that they were focussed on the same outcomes even though they may approach them from differing paths.
One of the outcomes of the focus on school improvement in England has been development of the National Strategies and associated ‘good’ teaching. Kenneth Ruthven (2005) examined both of these and came to the conclusion that ‘top down’ approaches to teacher professional development are not successful in promoting long term change. Ruthven’s belief is that ‘bottom up’ approaches encourage self-awareness in teachers through recognising and reviewing their assumptions about education and identifying their ideal and their actual practice. His recommendation is that universities and schools develop a partnership that has the teacher as a researcher of their own practice, believing that, “sustained university-school partnerships in which there is a mutual commitment and dialogic contribution to knowledge creation have the potential to make important contributions to the robust development and rigorous warranting of good practice.” (Ruthven, 2005, p.424)
From their longitudinal study into teacher change, Boyle et al (2005) consider that there are a number of reform types of professional development beginning to be used, particularly in England. Study groups, coaching and mentoring, personal and electronic networks and immersion in enquiry are some of the methods that are mentioned. One of the key findings of their enquiry was that coaching and research inquiry were found to be the most effective. They also consider that collaborative action research is very important in helping teachers to become
teachers participating had reported that they had changed one or more aspects of their practice, there was no triangulation of these self-reports. This would be viewed as a weakness of this study.
Arising out of the results of several research studies in New Zealand, Poskitt (2005) has concluded that effective professional development contains several interrelated phases: a rationale and purpose to the professional development activity with which the teachers involved are able to relate and understand, the process and the content of the activity needs to be developed collaboratively, and data about the teacher participants and the affected students needs to be systematically gathered to demonstrate teacher change and the effectiveness of the programme on student learning. Poskitt also considers that the duration and timing of the professional development are critical factors because she believes that at least two years is needed for significant teacher change. Poskitt summarises her model by stating, “Teacher change and student learning are most likely to occur when professional reading of educational theory is combined with the modelling of appropriate new behaviours, with opportunities to practice new behaviours, and with feedback and ongoing coaching and support from a community of learners.” (Poskitt, 2005, p.149)
Professional development has also been a concern for both teachers and those charged with ensuring ongoing student learning. Guskey (2002) would suggest that sustainability is a cyclical activity, where a teacher needs to experience both a successful professional development opportunity and a consequent enhancement of student learning before they will change their attitudes and beliefs, which will in turn motivate them to undertake further professional development. This cyclical theme is concurred by Poskitt and Taylor (2007) who consider that unless there is constant adaptation, one habitual pedagogy will be replaced by another. From their ongoing research in New Zealand schools, Poskitt and Taylor have identified a number of factors which are needed to sustain a culture of professional development and change. One of the more important factors is that there needs to be a change in the culture of the school where its structures and processes support the acquisition of teacher attributes of new knowledge, skills, attitudes and dispositions which facilitate the change process. As in previous
work, and supported by others in the literature, these authors reiterate that having time to develop professionally is a critical factor (Poskitt & Taylor, 2007).
From this review of effective professional development a number of themes have arisen. Having the time to learn and practice new behaviours is a common theme with several writers suggesting that it may take as long as two years for change to happen. Coupled with this is the belief that change does not happen in a linear fashion but is cyclical in nature and continual. Collaborative partnerships were another theme that was explored. Whether the collaboration was amongst a community of practising teachers, university-school partnerships, and peer teachers or between teachers and school administrators, the theme was constant. What was not apparent in the literature was collaboration with students and their parents which would be an interesting area to research. Having the resources to undertake professional development is also viewed as important, and several writers emphasised that change will only occur in the longer term if succour and supportive cultures are developed by the school staff.
Changing the focus of professional development to the classroom with the teacher as a primary researcher is proffered by several writers (Burbank & Kauchak, 2003; Guskey, 2003c; Ruthven, 2005). They suggest that teacher directed research, in which the setting of outcomes and the gathering of data around teacher change and student change, effectively leads to better outcomes for students. Having the classroom as a focus and the teacher as a researcher will also help to ensure that the purpose and rationale for any professional development is understood. Other techniques for professional development such as peer coaching, mentoring, electronic networks and research methodologies such as action research are also encouraged in the literature, and often suggested as being combined with teacher and classroom research (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Fullan, 1990; Roettger, 2006; Thiessen, 1992). Finally, the reflection by teachers of their assumptions, attitudes and beliefs is promoted by several writers (Beatty, 2000; Meade, 2005; R. Robinson & Carrington, 2002; Schon, 1995).
Whilst the idea of teachers acting as researchers of their own practice might have face validity what are its critical elements, its strengths and limitations and how will it lead to the enhancement of student learning?