thesisthoughts

OK, I’ve been in Australia for a week and a half already, and I feel that if I don’t start recording a bit of what I am going through, it will be lost.

I left Israel the day school finished for the year. Exhausted and stressed, I parted from my colleagues and from everything that the school year demands of me and got on the plane with my two younger children. Thank goodness they were cooperative and we all slept most of the way to Australia. The family welcome we received was as always, wonderful… our visit had begun.

Mylife is always intense, rushed and pressured, and so was the beginning of my month out here. The next morning, at 9 am, I was supposed to be at Monash University for the MERC (Monash Education Research Conference). I was panicking about finally turning up at the uni in person, after 3 years of online study. I was shy and unsure of how the day would go.

The day was interesting and varied. I payed particular attention to the kinds of work the research students were presenting and how they presented themselves as students and researchers.

The highlight of my day was finally meeting GP my supervisor and we had a nice lunch together. It seems to me that meeting someone face-to-face after years of online conversation is as unnerving as a real first time meeting.

The next article I attempt to write may very well be about distance education and the experiences I have had with it.  

After a weekend off (crammed full of family commitments), I was back at Monash on Monday and Tuesday. The Winter School for postgraduate students was a terrific way to get the feel of the campus, of the research assistance available and to start to chat to other new (and not so new) PhD students. The workshops were interesting and relevant and gave me a sense that I’m really getting started and that this PhD idea is viable.

I especially enjoyed the workshop by Dr  Judy Williams and Ros Winters on Self Study. The session on Autoethnography by Dr Peter De Vries and the sessions on writing by Rosemary Viete and Anne Prince were also very worthwhile.

One of the highlights of those days was going into the Matheson Library for the first time. The library staff have given me so much assistance over the past three years and really have catered for all my research needs, despite me being on the other side of the world. When I got to the Education section and started seeing the books I had used for my thesis (scanned as PDF files or read as ebooks) I almost couldn’t breathe. The excitement was immense. I had butterflies in my stomache and was simply overcome by the experience. I was shocked at my own reaction.

I took five books from the library that day. As I approached the loans desk, like a normal student doing an everyday act, only I was aware that I was a student in my fourth year at Monash, touching “real” library books for the first time.

My next post will tell about my experiences at the AATE coference in Hobart.

I can’t believe that it is almost a month since I wrote last. Things have been terribly hectic at school and I finished teaching both of my courses. At home things are also heating up as end of year concerts, parties  and ballet performances get closer. I am trying to organize an extra day off for study next year – otherwise there is no way that I will be able to keep up with all my commitments.

So what’s up?

School:

As every one who works in education knows, the end of the school year is a difficult period. There is a lot of tension in the air for many reasons: pressure to get everything done, not easy working with tired children who are dreaming about the swimming pool or their next party, the teachers still don’t know what they will be doing next year and they are nervous about it… I feel as though I am organizing hundreds of things at once and nothing gets done 100% properly and certainly not from A to B without interruptions.

Courses:

I finished teaching both my courses and received interesting feedback from both groups. I will write a separate post on that.

For the last meeting I showed the teachers the movie “The Freedom Writers” about the Freedom Writers Diary. It was a nice way to end the course and the movie touches many of the issues discussed during our learning. There was a great atmosphere in both groups and the movie and popcorn added a lot. There is nothing like sitting together and sniffling over a great movie.

I must quickly reread the written feedback I received and make some kind of report out of it. I must inform the Teachers’ Centers where the courses were held, and I want to get the school principals involved in what the teachers experienced. In addition I must start thinking about next year and how I will improve on this year’s programs.

I received an invitation to go to Tel Aviv to a meeting with those in charge of Language and literacy in the Education Department. They are interested in working with teachers and writing more next year and wanted to hear more about my courses. They are planning a series of filmed lectures on teaching writing which will be used in inservice teacher learning all over the country. The Centre for Educational Technology is producing them. They liked my ideas and I am already going to do one filmed lecture in the next month, before I go to Australia. It sounds like something new and exciting, but a bit scary too. Lecturing in front of a camera will be a totally new experience – I am used to developing a topic together with the teachers listening and participating.

Conference:

I swore to myself that I wouldn’t leave my paper to the last minute. This week this will be one item at the top of my list. My paper is on the last day of the conference and I probably will have a very small audience. I am quite happy about that as my main aim here is just gaining experience. The problem is that I was hoping to get it over and done with early in order to enjoy the conference.

PhD:

No progress here. I think in a way I am waiting to get to Australia to sit down face to face with my supervisors in order to get myself going. On the other hand, all I did and am doing with my courses is the ground work for this enormous project. What worries me here is the less you DO, the less self confidence you have. When I am busy reading and writing and discussing ideas I feel I can achieve this task, when I’m not involved, it looks impossible.

Good news:

GP wrote to congratulate me that my article for English in Australia is out, that he actually read it. I can’t wait to see it – exciting news.

I’m off to make huge lists of things to do. I WILL keep writing here!

Today’s workshop at N will be based entirely on materials brought by the teachers. We have an assessment  workshop  with written texts straight from the classrooms and then will have a workshop for peer evaluation of our new teacher narratives and  a rubric produced by one of the teachers. I am happy that the teachers feel comfortable bringing their materials to the group and that there are many pieces to choose from.

One message which is being communicated by the participants is that they are constantly surprised that they are now going back to classroom activities and teaching strategies from the past. They are realizing that it is legitimate to use “forbidden” activities from the Whole Language days.

I’ll write more after the session.

This week, school holidays for Passover,  I met with the teachers from N for a full day seminar. As we couldn’t meet at the teachers’ center, we met at my school. There are many benefits in this, including the use of our wonderfully equipped computer room and the friendly, educational environment (which we certainly don’t have this year at the center which is always “just about to be done up”). There is much to discuss about where external PL meetings take place and how the surroundings can contribute or hinder learning. An interesting comparison I should make is the experience I have this year at the two teachers’ centers, K and N.

Anyway, this time we met at my school, we began with hot coffee and cakes I brought with me. With 100% attendance (very rare, especially in school holidays) we began the seminar.

The day was divided into two parts – the first dealing with the digital text and the effect of the Internet on writing and the second on connections between reading and writing.

We began with a brilliant piece from You-tube, one I was introduced to by Ilana Snyder in the course I studied with her at Monash.

This piece has so much in it that I could have based a whole two hour workshop / lecture on it and still not touch all of the information and messages contained. The workshop was successful with very lively participation from all the participants (including those closer to the web and those that are barely computer literate).

My frustration with the Hebrew language surfaced again. Why aren’t there materials such as these being developed here daily? Why isn’t more material being translated?  When I bring something in English (even a cartoon), there is always tension in the air. Israeli teachers as a rule are threatened by the English language and would prefer not to use their knowledge in their learning, despite the fact that most have a fairly good grasp of the language.

Together we explored what our curriculum has to say about digital texts. I was surprised that most of the participants had not noticed these pages before. Then we moved on to a document that none of the participants knew existed, the standards booklet for  learning in an ICT environment. The necessary link between literacy teachers and the digital world out there is just not being formed. I got the impression that even the teachers who are technologically independent and do use computers and the Web in their teaching, have never dealt with the changes occurring in written language.

They were all interested and active and one of the senior teachers from my school commented that I must do the seminar (or at least part of it, with all the teachers at our school). I was satisfied that the questions were raised and that the topic is now “on the table”.

Two questions that need to be addressed, and of course were raised in the group are 1. the digital divide: “It’s not such a big deal at a school like this which teaches children from well off homes…” or “At our school there are no computers in the classroom and we don’t have lessons in the computer room…”   and 2. The expectation that teachers become more computer literate: “We have many teacher at our school that don’t know anything about computers, they are scared of them. How can they be expected to teach these things to the kids?”.

We then moved on to discuss the positive impact technology can have on student motivation to write. When I discussed blogs (explaining from the beginning as most had no idea what I was talking about) they were shocked by the possibilities. I could see that some of the teachers began racing in their minds what they can do with this new option, but others concentrated on the “why nots”: “My class is too big”‘, “I don’t have time to read all the writing and comment before it is posted”, “Who has time to check a blog every day and run it?”

I proudly presented the blog I am running for my students, I can’t wait to use blogging in other groups and classes next year.  

The second part of the day was dedicated to the connections between reading and writing. For a moment I was disappointed that I couldn’t show the powerpoint presentation I had prepared and then I realized that I didn’t need it. As a result the teachers talked more and I talked less – always a better situation.

As a starter they worked in pairs and prepared a venn diagram to present how reading and writing are similar and different. The discussion was very fruitful and the diagrams were very varied. I will scan them and post them on the virtual campus. We then opened up the discussion in the whole group. Later on I presented the research that has been done in the field and presented examples of work that can be done in the classroom, every day, to strengthen the connections between reading and writing. The aim is of course  to reinforce both writing and reading, and of course, thinking.

The most disturbing part of the discussion for me was when teachers who know how to combine the two spoke of how after “The Reading Wars”, they believed (or were specifically told) that everything they did in their Whole Language classrooms must be disregarded. As a result, they have been teaching reading very differently and writing has been totally separate. Some of the teachers in grades 1 & 2 commented that they thought that they weren’t allowed to ask the children to write until they “finished teaching reading” (Is that ever completed?). As the pendulum swings backwards and forwards, it seems that the more teachers are confused, and the less time is spent in real teacher learning, the results in the classroom are more destructive.  

 That’s it for today…

  This report was also recommended to me by GP.

One of the first things I noticed was that all the members of the committee are men, all politicians. I don’t know if any of them have the slightest hint of personal background knowledge on the subject. The “staff” members of the committee are all “Ms”.

One early question worrying me is why is a political body working on its own in isolation to produce this kind of report?

The report states:

“… quality teaching… has the greatest impact on the quality of student learning” (p. v). That is certainly a sentence which most would agree with, here it is unsupported though.

“International best practice indicates that teacher professional learning will be most effective when it is supported by a robust policy framework, and includes mechanisms for defining, certifying and recognising the development of teaching expertise” (p. xii).

According to the VIT Renewal of Registration Guidelines, 2007, all Victorian teachers are required to do 100 hours of professional learning every 5 years, in order to renew their registration.

The committee is concerned that emphasis is being placed on the quantity of professional learning and not the quality. The recommend demanding accreditation for professional learning providers, as is done in NSW and Scotland. The committee believes that at least 50% of the required hours be from accredited providers.

Another committee recommendation is that there be “…opportunities to progress through higher categories of teacher registration”- that a system of additional credential be established (as in Scotland and Ontario, Canada). In order to advance to a higher category, teachers would have to take part in PL which leads to credentials and demonstrate advanced teaching practice. (How on earth do you prove that?)

The committee recommends the establishment of a framework for PL which prepares teachers for school leadership positions and determines their eligibility to serve in those roles.

Chapter 3 Types of Content and Delivery

(p. xiii) “… variety is an essential characteristic”. This variety  relates both to content and delivery mode (inquiry based, action orientated, value of school based PL…).

The report explains that off site PL is “… most effective when it is undertaken by teams of teachers, and closely integrated with school based professional learning programs” (p. xiii). This is also true in my own experience, both as a participant and as a provider of PL. When teachers go back to school and share their learning and share their experiences in the classroom, the learning may have a better chance of being continued at school.

Chapter 4 – Implementing the Policy Framework in Schools

The report emphasises the importance of integrating PL into  “… teacher’s day-to-day work”. The claim that teachers prefer to learn during the school day. I agree that learning should be an important part of a teacher’s day and that it can indeed work effectively in the racing car pace of school, but it cannot replace the allocation of quiet learning time outside school hours.

“These programs should be informed by, and evaluated against, evidence of how professional learning activities have contributed to demonstrable improvements in teaching practice and student learning” (p. xiv).

Of course this statement is not supported by suggestions of HOW THESE THINGS CAN BE DETERMINED. As hard as it is to recognise “improvements in teaching practice”‘ it is far harder to relate particular changes (improvements?) to a particular PD course or coaching session at school. It is just as difficult to connect student learning to a particular learning event undertaken by a particular teacher.

Chapter 5 – Early Childhood Sector

Recommendations  – P. xvii

The committee calls for the compulsory recording of all PL activities and their outcomes (p. xix).

How should I record the learning I am doing this morning while blogging these notes I wrote a month ago? How should I record the life changing effect these notes are having on the teachers I work with and on my grade 6 pupils?

I don’t know why it annoys me so much, but why on earth is Committee written with a capital C? (p. 3).

“As a comprehensive review of all available literature lay beyond the scope of the inquiry, the Committee relied primarily on written and oral submissions to summarise or draw attention to salient research” (p. 3).

International investigations – Finland, Scotland, Canada (p. 5-6)

Definitions:

• teacher – (p. 7 )
• PL (and PD) – (p. 8 )

Distinction between PD and PL (School of Education, Victoria University, NSW Institute of Teachers) – (P.

“The Committee supports this differentiation between the learning that results from activities aimed at developing professional expertise, and the activities themselves” (p. 8).

The Australian Education Union provided a list of activities which can be considered PD. Included are writing articles for professional journals, curriculum writing and internet discussion groups. (p. 9)

Effective is defined by outcomes. The Committee believes there should be an improvement in student learning.

The use of the term “teacher expertise” is always interesting.

“… if a professional development activity does not enhance teacher expertise, then professional learning has not taken place.” (p. 10). The Committee admits that professional learning is not neccessarily “new knowledge” (p. 10). Very often it supports and enriches previous knowledge.

A survey is quoted to present the fact that often teachers do not change their teaching as a result of their PD activities.

The Committee believes that Victorian schools should continue to look for changes in teaching practice as a determinant of the effectiveness of PL, it also notes the subtleties that must be taken into account. (p. 10).

“The Committee recognizes that professional learning may still benefit teachers even if their practice does not noticeably change, by increasing their confidence in their existing practice or contributing incrementally to changes in practice in time” (p. 10). This may not be bad. I imagine there are teachers around doing some good things in their classrooms. If they just increse their confidence and receive positive feedback on their practice… should that be replaced by change???

“… relationship between teacher professional learning and student learning is most complex of all” (p. 10). At least this is acknowledged.

Points raised:

• This connection is long term
• differences between classrooms make it hard to determine
• sometimes teacher learning affects students in different ways, not necessarily in their achievement levels.

The evaluation of teacher professional learning in Victoria is based ob teacher satisfaction levels, parent opinions and student surveys. The report recognises that it is very complicated to evaluate teacher learning by student outcomes, another method is to examine the characteristics of professional learning.

In 2005 the Department of Education and Training published “Seven Principles of Highly |Effective Professional Learning”

1. Focused on student outcomes (not just individual teacher needs.
2. Focused and embedded in teaching practice (not disconnected from schools).
3. Informed by best available research on effective teaching and learning (not just limited to current teacher knowledge).
4. Collaborative, involving reflection and feedback (not just individual inquiry).
5. Evidence based and data driven (not anecdotal) to guide improvement and measure impact. (???????)
6. Ongoing, supported and fully integrated into the culture and operations of the system – schools, networks, regions and the centre (not episodic, fragmented).
7. An individual and collective responsibility at all levels of this system (not just the school level) and is not optional.

Context for the Inquiry – P. 12

- This is a period of “heightened professional accountability” (p. 12).

-”Professional Learning Research Strength, Faculty of Education, Monash University, cautioned against a paradigm of professional learning that conceptualises it as a ‘remedy for deficiencies and gaps in teachers’ existing practices’ ” (p. 12).

Many particularly suggested professional learning ” to be regarded as a means of recognising and supporting teacher professionalism, not as a way to address perceived ‘defecits’ in teacher expertise” (p. 12).

Chapter 2 – p. 15 – Towards an Effective Policy Framework

VIT – Victoria’s regulatory teaching authority

A policy for the development of teacher ezpertise may involve:

• professional learning
• professional standards for defining teacher expertise
• policies for certifying teacher expertise through professional credentials
• policy for the recognition of teacher expertise through rewards and incentives

Imust reread Grahm Parr’s article which argues for distiunction between quality teachers and quality teaching.

VIT – “The Institute is charged with recognising and promoting the profession of teaching, and regulating members of the Victorian teaching profession” (p. 52). There are similar bodies in most states and a national body “Teaching Australia” est 2005.

 Pre-service Teachers (p. 19)

There is a 4 year teacher education program + practicum. Programs must be VIT accredited.

The authors of the report are happy with the changes which have occurred since the standards were introduced and would like to see similar guidlines for practicing teachers.

Provisionally registered teachers

Questions relating to current policy:

1. Can early carreer teachers cope with extra PD in their first year/s of teaching?
2. Should they take the time for PD in the first year/s?
3. Should they need it?
4. Is the aim to add to pre-service knowledge or to give “support or encouragement as they apply the knowledge they bring with them to their day-to-day work”?  (p. 20)

The committee believes that beginning teachers should have access to external PD but should concentrate on mentoring and support within schools.

Current Policy for Provisionally Registered Teachers p. 20

Provisional registration is 12 months up to full registration, at least 80 days of teaching and an “evidence-based assessment process to demonstrate that their teaching meets or exceeds the VIT’s standards for professional practice for full registration”.

Seminars, mentor programs with a school based panel -

• The required work for the program is a problem for many teachers
• time is also an issue for mentors
• A school based panel can be problematic…

In NSW there is an external assessment  rather than a school based assessment (solves the objectivity issues).

Registered Teachers

“… increased teacher enthusiasm and morale are important outcomes of teacher professional learning… “ (p. 23).

Current Policy Framework for Registered Teachers

Every 5 years teachers must:

• demonstrate ongoing suitability
• undergo a criminal history check
• do a minimum of 50 days of teaching
• and now… do a hundred hours of PD (at least 50 hours outside school).

In Israel teachers are not required to do any of these things to remain teaching.

Quality assurance of PD in Victoria

Professional Development Interface (PDI) online - an online database of PL providers.

Participant feedback is an important tool but is very subjective. There must be a formal system of quality assurance. The Committee suggests that 50 of the 100 required hours be provided by an accredited source.

Principles of Learning and Teaching PoLT (p. 31)

rubric for examining practice.

Certification for Professional Learning

The Committee believes this can help. They recommend higher tertiary study for teachers but acknowledge that this is not always possible because of the time and the cost.

In Ontario, there  is a separate system of credentialing specific for teacher professional learning. It is called the “Additional Qualifications Framework”.

84% of teachers sign up, at their own expense, on holidays and weekends.

In Scotland there is the “Framework for Professional Recognition”. It is based on curriculum subjects and cross curricular (literacy, special needs etc) and also caters for mentoring and leadership training. Accommodation is made for self evaluation, reflection, discussion and professional learning.

Accomplished and Expert Teachers (p. 35)

Table 2.4 Department of Education and Early Childhood Development

Professional Standards for Teachers

• Graduate teachers
• Accomplished teachers
• Expert teachers
• Leading teachers

“Progress through the levels is conditional on the demonstration of advanced teaching practice, evaluated against applicable professional standards. At present… in goverment schools the decision to progress a teacher to a higher level of salary rests with the principal” (p. 37).

2008 NSW Institute of Teaching – added two additional levels for teachers:

1. Professional Accomplishment
2. Professional Leadership.

These levels are based on reports made by the school and external assessors.

In Western Australia there is the “Senior Teacher program”. Teachers must undergo “recent and relevant studies at a college or uni or specific professional learning programs”.

The Committee believes that “the development of higher categories of teacher registration would provide a valuable incentive and opportunity for Victorian teachers to develop their professional expertise to an advanced level”.

The Committee believes that “the program should not reflect the attainment of credentials alone but should also require teachers to demonstrate advanced teaching practice” (p. 39).

The report quotes a survey:

“… principals and teachers in leadership roles tended to rate overall measures of quality, relevance and support for their professional learning much more highly than those in classroom based roles” (??????????)

In 2008 there were plans to create an Institute of Educational Leadership.

Summary and Recommendations (p. 44 – 46)

Chapter 3 Types of Content and Delivery (p. 47)

Participants expect “the content of teachers professional learning to be based on sound educational research international best practice, and scientifically proven teaching methods” (p. 47).

They also expect “credible presenters with strong background knowledge…”

ICT (p. 55)

Modes of Delivery (p. 62)

Learning through Practice (p. 65)

“Arguably, the most important form of teacher professional learning occurs through actual teaching practice. Practicing teachers learn constantly, by experimenting with new approaches and developing practice to meet emerging needs. The Committee heard that an important part of learning through practice is reflection, or thinking about practice, either individually or through discussion with colleagues” (p. 65).

“The Australian Centre for Effective Partnerships commented that teachers need encouragement and support to engage in ongoing reflection on their practice” (p. 65).

Learning from each other (p. 67)

Peer observation, mentoring, working in teams, networking beyond the school.

Electronic collaboration and web 2.0 (p. 74)

Joint research (p. 77)

Professional Reading (p. 79)

Online Professional learning (p. 105)

Parliament of Victoria. (2009). Education and training committee final report: Inquiry into effective strategies for teacher professional learning. Retrieved March 10, 2009, from http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/etc/reports/professional%20learning/fullreport.pdf

I have just finished reading one of the second hand books I bought from Better World Books.

15 minutes free writing:

I was surprised to find this book in the catalogue and even more surprised when I began reading it. This narrative was written ten years ago but very much reflects the type of work I am doing and the type of texts I am producing. 

Miller Power works (worked?) with students learning to be teachers and writing teachers and taught them methodology through writing. Her course was based on the students reflecting and writing narratives and on the author responding at length to the stories which appeared in journals and assignments.

I quickly connected to Miller Power’s style and chose to read this book without pencil in hand, something I rarely do. There was something about the name of the book and the opening texts which signalled to me that this short book would be read and reread by me.

There are a variety of texts in the book, many written by students.

Some of the important messages for me at this stage are:

• Somebody else wrote of her experiences teaching writing teachers to write. There are many more texts out there waiting for me to discover them.
• It is extremely interesting to read narratives of someone else’s work, somewhere else in a different context. Many details are different but many of the dilemmas, difficulties and triumphs are similar.
• Jumping to conclusions about students or teachers is a terrible mistake. listening is the only real way to avoid it. (It relates to my conclusion that I must spend much more time and effort getting to know the teachers and for them to gain trust in each other, early on in the course).
• Very often personal narratives which seem unrelated at first glance, turn out to be very relevant to teaching writing.
• The view that writing is a born trait is more common than I thought it was.
• A short course, CAN make a difference, though not always.
• Our own experiences can and should be utilized in our teaching.

I promise there will be more…

Miller Power, B. (1997). Long roads, short distances: Teaching writing and writing teachers.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

This must be the best bookshop around. The prices are wonderful and the books arrive overseas very quickly. The books I chose were all second hand, many ex-library books and were all in good condition. Try them!

An interesting article from the States:

Teacher Training Goes in Virtual Directions

“… To foster such discussions, professional development leaders must help teachers to establish trust, develop communication norms that enable critical dialogue, and maintain a balance between respecting individual community members and critically analyzing issues in their teaching (Frykholm, 1998; Seago, 2004).  

This week I ran a workshop for my group at K. I was pleasantly surprised beforehand that so many of the participants did writing activities in their classrooms and sent me examples of student texts.

After thanking those that made the effort to send me material for the workshop, I explained that our aim is to learn from the students’ writing and to experience examining texts looking through “positive glasses” and not through the “groan, spelling mistake, terrible writing…” glasses. Our aim was to look at what the students KNOW about writing, rather than point out heir problems. I asked the teachers to treat the work of their colleagues with sensitivity and respect.

The workshop wasn’t bad and I had plenty of positive feedback from the participants but after reading the article by Borko, yesterday, I understood something that is starkly missing in the course – a real feeling of being a learning community. I can’t really blame the size of the group or the participants because in N the same situation exists (though less so).

I must spend a lot of time and energy at the beginning of the course forming a group, gaining trust from the teachers, hearing far more from them about what happens in their classrooms. I must also think hard to determine ways that the online section of the course (which incidentally has more discussion between the teachers themselves on their practice – through the use of teaching narratives) can help foster trust and security within the group.

I am worried that one of the teachers felt badly about the way questions were asked and the way others saw the work of her students. I have made a note to talk to her. I read here yesterday that if teachers come to a course sure that their practice is perfect, no learning will take place. It is my responsibility to help those teachers on their road to questioning and learning.

I used to give one teacher 15 minutes or so of each meeting to present something she does in her classroom. This was always popular with the participants but the time given was really was only to share ideas. I never dared use the time for the teacher to raise dilemmas or share difficulties or for the participants and I to critically evaluate the ideas or practices for the benefit of everyone’s learning.

This is an area which definitely deserves more thought and discussion.

That’s it for now…

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain [Electronic version]. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-15.

I was happy to see that Sage are having another month of free access to all of their journals. They can be accessed here.

 The first article I chose to read is by Hilda Borko, one of the researchers cited in the Stanford report (although they cite a different study). This article maps the research which has been completed or is currently underway in the field of PD and teacher learning, but more importantly, it outlines necessary directions for new research.

Borko presents examples of policy papers (e.g. No Child Left Behind – 2001) which call for “high-quality” PD programs for teachers. She notes that these policy makers do not usually include descriptions of what constitutes quality programs and guidelines how they can be achieved. Citing the work of Ball and Cohen (1999) and Putnam and Borko (1977), the author claims that PD programs are usually “fragmented, intellectually superficial, and do not take into account what we know about how teachers learn” (p. 3).

 Borko believes that much progress has been made in the past 20 years of research, and that there is evidence available that teacher learning can influence instruction and student learning. Despite this progress, she is aware that “we are only beginning to learn, however, about exactly what and how teachers learn from professional development, or about the impact of teacher change on student outcomes” (p. 3).

The author adopts the situative theory of learning which views “learning as changes in participation in socially organized activities, and individuals’ use of knowledge as an aspect of their participation in social practices” (p. 4). She quotes Adler (2000, p. 37) “… a process of becoming knowledgeable in and about teaching”.

 Teacher learning takes place in a variety of different contexts, in the classroom, at school and in PD frameworks. Research on the professional learning of teachers must examine the teachers as individual learners and the context in which the learning is based.

Borko lists the main elements of PD systems:

• “The professional development program;
• The teachers, who are the learners in the system;
• The facilitator, who guides teachers as they construct new knowledge and practices; and
• The context in which the professional development occurs” (p. 4).

 The author chooses to divide research into three phases, each continuing on from the previous phase.

“Phase 1 research activities focus on an individual program at a single site. Researchers typically study the professional development program, teachers as learners, and and the relationship between these two elements of the system. The facilitator and the context remain unstudied. In phase 2, researchers study a single professional development program enacted by more than one facilitator at more than one site, exploring the relationship among facilitators, the professional development program and teachers as learners. In phase 3, the research focus broadens to comparing multiple professional development programs, each enacted at multiple sites. Researchers study the relationships among all four elements of a professional development system: facilitator, professional development program, teachers as learners and context”. (p. 4).

Aims of the different phases:

• Phase 1 – to prove that a particular PD program can have a positive influence on teacher learning.
• Phase 2 – to determine whether a particular PD program can be delivered “with integrity”, in different locations by different facilitators.
• Phase 3 – “to provide comparative information about the implementation, effects, and resource requirements of well-defined professional development programs” (p. 11).

Phase 1 -

• Most of the research done to date has been this kind.
• usually small studies
• usually the creators of the program are the researchers.
•  ”evoke images  of the possible… not only documenting that it can be done, but also laying out at least one detailed example of how it was organized, developed, and pursued” (Shulman. 1983, p. 495).
• provide evidence of the positive influence of teacher learning communities on learning and instruction.
• “Records of practice are powerful contexts for teacher learning” (p. 7). (e.g. videos of lessons, student work, lesson plans).
• The challenge of exploring the individual teacher learner and the community is discussed.

Phase 2:

“A professional development program must be well defined and clearly specified before researchers can investigate how it is enacted by multiple facilitators in multiple settings, and what resources are needed to ensure its effectiveness” (p. 9).

Borko did not find any programs which are able to prove that they can be presented “with integrity” in different locations by different facilitators. She does however bring a few examples of programs (like the NWP), which are aiming towards this goal or are widespread.

In my experience… In previous years, when we used to sit as a team to plan PL courses, they always turned out to be very different, despite the similar content. The way a facilitator understands the material, the group of teachers participating (motivation, background knowledge, willingness to take learning to the classroom and bring it back for reflection…) and even the physical conditions at the PD centre (technology, atmosphere, set up of tables…) all make a huge difference.

Today, I am teaching the same material in two different sites and I can see that the courses are very different. The differences between the groups and even the physical conditions at the teachers’ centre determine, very often, how the workshop will be delivered.

Phase 3:

“Research tasks include gathering and analyzing data from multiple professional development programs, as they are enacted by multiple facilitators at multiple sites” (p. 11).

The author does not know of any phase 3 research that has been done, despite its importance for resource allocation.

Directions for future PD design and research:

• important for research to be done in all 3 phases
• investigating whether the characteristics of effective PD programs can be utilized when planning PD in a different content area.
• Projects like the NWP should explore whether their content and materials are sufficiently clear to enable other sites to  present them “with integrity”.
• Phase 2 must explore the dilemmas associated with “fidelity and adaptation”. “Which elements of a program must be preserved to ensure the integrity of its underlying goals and principles” (p. 13).
• In stage 3 there will be a need for new data collection and analysis tools.
• Stage 3 research – “resource requirements for successful enactment of professional development programs and impact on teacher and student learning” (p. 13).

Reading this article has helped me put my blurry image of my research into perspective. According to Borko’s division into 3 phases, my work will be stage one.. or maybe stage 2…? 

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain [Electronic version]. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-15.