Critique of [Continuing] Teacher Development
Introduction
Effective and competent academic professionals are the most important resources of academic institutions. Thereby, the continuous development of these professionals of is enormously important in the vitality of the industry and the betterment of the posterity. The dynamics of professional development now centers the ideology that academic professionals are instrumental in advocating, facilitating and renewing affirmative and constructive changes for the academic industry. In an environment where lifelong learning is a commonplace, professional development was perceived to be the panacea. Continuing professional development is an integral component of professional development.
Signifying the development of intellectual, affective and psychomotor domains of an individual, professional development enables teachers to expand and fulfill their personal and professional potential as well as meeting the present and future demands of the job and the workplace – formally and or unplanned and unstructured. As a process of acquiring knowledge, experience and skills, professional development assures teachers to meet the required expertise and competencies that relate to the evolving professional practice (Gaff, Festa and Gaff, 2006).
Perceived to be effective role models, teachers must, and are expected to, be committed in lifelong learning. Teacher development is the key to enhance the quality of teaching and learning whereby classroom practices and student learning outcomes are directly influenced. Teacher learning, or the objective general process, then is crucial in order to respond to changes that are occurring in the world around them. As such, for the continuing professional development of teachers to flourish, professional knowledge must be updated and professional competence must be improved.
The importance of teacher development as a profession will be analysed based on the two focal challenges: the interplay between pedagogical beliefs and technology and teacher collaboration as an emergent professional culture. Fundamentally, the pressures of incorporating technology in the education setting are relatively high and the nonconsensual of what constitutes teacher collaboration could either support or obstruct teacher development.
Teacher Development: Pedagogical Beliefs and Technology Integration
Teachers’ professional development focuses on developing process, leadership and tasks skills. Process and leadership skills contend with effectiveness, functioning and systems thinking whereas task skills are those that are required on the accomplishment of a specific undertaking. The integration of technology as a teaching tool is one of the examples. From a personal standpoint, technology is a vital element to empowering students as lifelong learners. However, technology also changes the teaching schema from teacher-centered to learner-centered instruction. We are in a point where technology and its influence on education are inescapable.
The challenges represented by technology, further, has a greater emphasis on the conduct and practices of the teachers, opposing the traditional teaching-learning experience inside the classroom. Though technology is now regarded as a valuable, powerful and well-functioning instructional tool, technology challenges the core values and principles of teachers as well. Ertmer (2005) stressed that the pedagogical beliefs of academic professionals were viewed to be one of the barriers in the successful integration of computers into the educational system, and this has profound effects on the continuing professional development of the teachers themselves in ways more than one. The episodic, unbounded and idiosyncratic nature of beliefs might be the rationale behind this.
The point being assumed here is that how teachers process the conception of integrating technology in the educational sphere and how it could alter or modify their deeply held beliefs in teaching could not be easily reconciled. Indeed, promoting the technological change affects not just the beliefs or the practices per se of the teachers but processes and systems of teaching unique to their individuality as a teacher that they are used to as well. Assumingly, more than being a challenge to their profession, technological integration in the classroom, perhaps from the perspective of the teachers, is more on the concern of the quality of knowledge to be taught with the aid of computers. Hirsch and Walshe (1998) pointed out that determining to what extent the quality of teaching is responsible for student achievement and attributing technological teaching quality to teacher development would be difficult (p. 23).
It is clearly mentioned that technology is an instructional innovation whereby belief will play a significant role in whether or how to adopt and implement such. Ertmer (2005) failed to mention, nevertheless, the implications of why teachers are holding tightly on their pedagogical beliefs to the extent that they are resisting the change. From what I have learned already, teachers are very particular on how they can contribute to the quality education and how they can mold students to becoming better members of the society; the essence of being a teacher, that is. Based on this context, incorporating technology within the academic institutions is not just the challenge to the pedagogical beliefs of the present but also of the future, with respect to the student learning. Revealing a shortcoming of professional development, standardised approaches disregards the varied needs and experiences of teachers (Diaz-Maggioli, 2004, p. 4).
Technological integration within the academic circle assumes that teachers should perform at the same level regardless of the needs and experience, which should not be the case. Following from Marcinkiewicz’ (1993) assertion that narrowing the gap between teachers and computers should be of high priority. The main point to consider, however, is that teachers, in general, have lower confidence and negative beliefs on their technological capabilities and proficiency, and that teaching teachers of the applications of technology takes longer time towards becoming experts. An assumption of this view is that teachers have inherent assertion that their inadequacies could jeopradise their profession and the value of education they could provide for their students. Familiarity would be the key, yes; but it could be also hurt the process of teachers’ technological development, as what the researchers are advocating. Professional development never meant to change the beliefs of the teachers; but to improve them in such a way that teachers could contribute more productively and proactively.
From Nespor’s (1987) argument, it can be determined that instructional change are not inclined on abandoning pedagogical beliefs but working on what is already valuable and then replacing them with more relevant beliefs. Resistance to change is a natural occurrence especially when the strongest beliefs are being defied. Realising this, it could be safe to suppose that in the realms of professional development, the goal is to advance the knowledge, skills, competencies and expertise, not necessarily to completely change them or abandon previous know-how and capabilities. The missing concept is its application to pedagogical beliefs wherein the purpose is not to entirely change these beliefs but just to adjust with the pressures and challenges brought by the changing time such as the technology.
Using Ertmer’s (2005) work it is possible to show that curriculum-based technological integration follows a transformative, processual path wherein teachers could be technologically empowered through small-scale applications. It is also explicitly brought up that acquiring the adeptness in using technology takes more than three years, making the constructivist approaches of utilizing technology for teachers somewhat obscure while also limiting teachers’ motivation to do so. Further, it could be logical to reason that students, at the confines of their homes, could be taught independently on computer applications, serving a threat to the teachers especially when their self-importance could be questioned. As such, self-efficacy beliefs should be also an important undertaking for professional development (Albion, 1999).
Personally, the technology-rich classrooms could never materialise fully if teachers are either mandated or forced. Teachers will continually used teaching styles and methods that they grown accustomed with, and they won’t trade it if it means to sacrifice their pedagogical beliefs that prove to be effective even before technology were introduced. This conception is taken from the similar view of Niederhauser and Stoddart (2001) when they say that the use of technology must be consistent with the pedagogical beliefs of the teachers. The statement that teachers with teacher-centered beliefs would likely to refuse to go along with technology utilisation holds very true. The challenge for professional development is to transform the current pedagogical beliefs into objective pedagogical beliefs and practices while protecting meaningful learning on the part of the students, and also of the teachers.
Teacher Development: Teacher Collaboration as the Emergent School Culture
Teacher collaboration is the concept that takes in hand working together towards strengthening professional practice and intensifying the understanding of teaching. Embedded on the spirit of mutual respect, collegiality and supportive professional relationships, teaching strategies and learning principles are at the core of the teacher collaboration. As a reflective practice as it is, teacher collaboration serves as the common ground to share ideas, to self-evaluate, to incorporate new teaching strategies, to improve teaching skills and to heighten appreciation for teamworking and respecting colleagues (Hinds and Spencer, 2006).
Teacher collaboration, its realms and boundaries and its challenges and limitations had been some of the troublesome issues that confront the academic industry. Leonard and Leonard (2003) maintains that the institutionalisation of collaborative working environments significant to the establishment and upholding of academic institutions as professional learning communities. Isolationism and individualism are common for teachers essentially because of the demanding profession. What has become to be a new norm for teachers is the notion that leveraging student performance requires working as a team. However, major barriers towards creating an effective and sustainable learning community entrenched on teacher collaboration prevail. The continuing collaborative challenge must be addressed before it can be regarded as a genuine teacher development environment.
Teacher collaboration already exists decades ago without realising that it is indeed teacher collaboration; unconsciously being practiced. Even so, the point of view argued for here is that without the presence of accountability as a collective responsibility, teams working within an educational environment will not be successful in their endeavors. Further, the non-existence of cooperativism, individual development and team interdependence will suffer and that professional and personal contributions will not be recognized. What drives a team to function more efficiently are clear purpose, quality communication, coordination, effective protocols and procedures and efficient conflict resolution mechanisms, and the active engagement of the team members.
The above scenario, however, is applicable to formal teamworking and collegiality where the encouragement to build professional learning communities is regulated. In reality, teacher collaboration exists problematical because of the lack of ownership of professional developments processes for the communities of practice as well as to reap the benefits of its result. Simply, teacher collaborations are very informal to the extent that it bypasses school authorities. All the same, we cannot argue that being informal was appalling and that authorities having jurisdictions are proactive and responsible enough to meddle with the teacher development per se.
Teacher collaboration has been a buzzword in the academic setting for quite sometime now as an incremental element for school-based decision-making. As informal as it is, teacher collaboration could prove to be effective especially when teachers are one in the belief that the quality of education could be achieved inside the premise of the school and that instruction is most effective if characterised by norms of collegiality and continuous improvement (Smith and Scott, 1990). Such notion points to the fact that teacher collaborations are voluntary. Indeed, as shown in the conducted study, collaborations among teachers happen in close proximity wherein the individual decision is a matter of personal choice.
Impacting the professional development of each teachers involve, individual contributions should be equally valued despite the fact that it can vary greatly. The evidences of miscommunication and frustration will be apparent if the collaborating teachers lack goal sharing. Aside from recognizing that inputs are integral to the collaborative effort, the activities and processes toward proactive teacher development must be built on sound goals. Shred responsibility for key decisions and shared accountability for outcomes would be pivotal for this endeavor. According to Friend and Cook (1992), each teacher is equal in making fundamental decisions as an effort to reinforce the sense of parity that exists among them. Teachers should be also held accountable for the results of these decisions either positive or negative.
Provided that teacher collaboration would mean the professional working relationship among teachers, it must aim at functioning from a more restrictive to less restrictive environment. In carrying out this purpose, the barriers in working collaboratively must be addressed. Time and age group have been viewed as the main barriers, contributing to the demise leading to hasty problems and quick-fix ideas and preventing sophisticated co-teaching approaches. Another problem is the requirements for more sophisticated communication and conflict resolution skills as well as for teachers who prefer working in isolation (Ibid). As such, professional development could only be possible through creating a collaborative culture.
Collaboration is very important on the design of professional development but unless the school community recognises the value of collaboration because it impacts student learning, the creation of such culture would only be rhetoric. Professional learning communities consist of participants that interact on the basis of professional matter such as pedagogy, content and assessment. As such professional communities are communities that build mutual trust and respect and culture of sharing. Since collaborative skills are used in overcoming fragmented individualism in the teachers’ pool, collaborative culture recognizes that conflicts are part of the process (as cited in NPEAT, n.d. p. 11).
Recommendation
For both the challenges, the paper recommends that teacher development should heed and pursue the characteristics of visionary professional development from the attributes of traditional professional development. Within the teaching-learning settings, collaborative decision-making through a growth-driven approach and collective construction of andragogical programmes should be the main concerns. Inquiry-based ideas, tailor-made techniques and varied and timely delivery methods should be likewise applied. In addition, adequate support systems, context-specific and proactive programmes should be established.
All of these must be practiced for the purpose of responding to the challenges discussed above as well as the challenges imposed by the technocratic nature of professional development content where teachers are expected to replicate taught techniques inside the classroom just like the technological integration and by the inaccessibility to professional development opportunities that seldom reach teachers such as formal teacher collaboration..
Conclusion
For teachers, like any other professionals, the purpose of professional development is the life long learning where teachers are educated to meet the academic and individual needs of students. There are two perennial challenges in achieving lifelong learning as shaping pedagogical beliefs of teachers and cultivating a collaborative culture. Professional development serves as the cornerstone strategy which viewed teachers as professional learners based on their understanding of their profession and performance and learning together or learning while in teams embedded on the thought that they are responsible in the success of every student within the school community.
Reference
Albion, P. R. (1999). Self-Efficacy Beliefs as an Indicator of Teachers’ Preparedness for Teaching with Technology. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Diaz-Maggioli, G. (2004). Teacher-Centered Professional Development. ASCD.
Friend, M., & Cook, L. (1992). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. White Plains, NY: Longman
Gaff, S. S., Festa, C. and Gaff, J. G. (2006). Professional Development: A Guide to Resources. Transaction Publishers.
Hinds, N. and Spencer, L. (2006). Program for Quality Teaching: Teacher Collaboration. British Columbia’s Teachers’ Federation (BCTF).
Hirsch, D. and Walshe, J. (1998). Staying Ahead: In-Service Training and Teacher Professional Development. Centre for Educational Research and Innovation: OECD Publishing.
Leonard, L. and Leonard, P. (2003). The Continuing Trouble with Collaboration: Teachers Talk. Current Issues in Education, 6(15).
National Partnership for Excellence and Accountability in Teaching (NPEAT). (n.d.). What learner-centered professional development looks like – Revisioning Professional Development. Report.
Smith, S. C. and Scott, J. L. (1990). The collaborative school. Eugene: University of Oregon, ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment