The work of this group of teachers is based on the premise that “inquiry is central to the work of teaching, that it requires community, and that communities of practice can take  a myriad of forms” (p. 596). These teachers have formed a community of learning, despite the geographical distance between them.

An interesting point made is that the teachers searched for this kind of professional support group despite the fact that they were seasoned teachers. They mention feeling disappointed and secluded in their classrooms.

The authors, teacher educators, are concerned with two problems:

1. Teachers are expected to teach “in dialogic ways” but have never been taught anything in this manner.
2. They “rarely have the opportunity to experience sustained exploration of a complex idea, let alone through dialogic practices” (p. 598).

The authors cite Gavalek and Raphael (1996) who described learning as “as a complex, iterative process of social engagement, reflection, and transformation” (p. 602).

The authors argue that teachers are detached from their colleagues in their work and that their professional lives are dictated by others. “Missing from the lives of teachers is the opportunity to articulate and investigate with others the means for improving our practice and the learning of those with whom we work.” (p. 606). Learning communities are suggested as an appropriate solution.

The authors base these understandings on the theories of learning suggested by Vygotsky (1978). “Individuals learn, but that learning begins, and is based in, social activity or the social plane. This social plane is reflected in the public and shared discourse of the teacher study groups as ideas are appropriated and transformed” (p. 606).

The work of Swales (1990) and Gee (1992), also helped the authors understand the significance of social communication. “Knowledge of the language practices within a discourse community provides access to that community and defines who the community members are. Language is a key factor in the development of our identities-as professionals, as educators, as literacy educators, and as teacher researchers.

Understanding the importance of the discourse community helps us to create opportunities for access and opportunities to harness the power of conversation to move beyond the immediate setting and effect important changes in practice” (p. 606).

I like the balanced statement appearing at the end of the article:

“Thus, while we are not naive about the historical privileging of academic research in which teachers serve as “subjects” or “informants”, we are also not sanguine about such work. We underscore teacher research as another powerful, but-like university-driven research-also limited genre for the study of education” (p. 606).

Raphael, T. E., Florio-Ruane, S., Kehus, M. J., George, M. A., Levorn Hasty, N., & Highfield, K. (2001). Thinking for ourselves: Literacy learning in a diverse teacher inquiry network. The Reading Teacher, 54(6), 596-607.