MY THEORETICAL POSITION AND AN INTRODUCTION TO WENGER'S THEORETICAL/CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
3.4 HOW I DEVELOPED MY PERSPECTIVE OR 'THEORY' OF TEACHER LEARNING AND ITS INFLUENCE ON THE TEMS MODEL FOR
3.4 HOW I DEVELOPED MY PERSPECTIVE OR 'THEORY' OF TEACHER
Ideally I would have wanted teachers to have time to watch one another teach and to have conversations about their teaching. I expected that conversations among teachers would provide opportunities to grapple with the meaning of the new curriculum (with regard to EMS and EMS teaching) and to appreciate what the new EMS curriculum meant for practice.
I envisioned that in the group processes, learning would focus not only on understanding new EMS content ideas but also on translating these ideas into practice and figuring out how to manage the practical challenges that may emerge in the process. In participating in discussions about practice, teachers would be active in their own learning.
I saw the curriculum for teacher learning as involving an array of 'artefacts' that included the new Revised National Curriculum Statement, materials that teachers used and
developed, teachers' practice, materials that I had developed and provided, as well as the teacher development workshop sessions. The curriculum for teacher learning was
designed to support teachers' learning about Economic and Management Sciences and their learning about how these ideas could be translated into practice.
Teachers' daily practice and their efforts to engage with teaching EMS was an important component of the curriculum for teacher learning in the TEMS project. Learning would involve teachers participating in inquiry and reflection about their practice and in solving pedagogical problems that were meaningful to teachers as learners. Such conversations would afford opportunities for teachers to work together to 'figure out' what practising EMS teaching might involve. They would also be afforded opportunities to gain insights from others on the practical problems of putting EMS teaching ideas into practice and to construct solutions to these problems together.
In adopting this perspective, I tried to ensure that knowledge was not a commodity, which I as the university academic (EMS expert) brought to the project. Instead, knowledge was in part constructed through the reflection and thinking enabled by the
interaction among peers about their practice and guided by questions posed by myself and fellow participants. From a situative perspective, the curriculum for teacher learning would support ongoing inquiry about ideas presented in the new Revised National
Curriculum Statement and their implications for day-to-day EMS practice.Itincluded not only subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge, but also practical knowledge to translate EMS ideas into practice. By adopting this (situative) perspective on teacher learning, my implicit assumption was that the curriculum for teacher learning would be stretched over an array of artefacts and events, a position supported by Rogoff (1990). Itwas envisioned that a combination of these artefacts and events would form an integrated curriculum for teacher learning. The curriculum for teacher learning would then be situated across the new Revised National Curriculum Statement with special reference to EMS, classroom curricula materials, and teachers' attempts to implement EMS practice.
Grossman et al (2001) refer to what they term theessential tension of teacher community.
There exists a tension between improving professional practice by improving pedagogic skills and thecontinuing intellectualdevelopment in the subject matter of the school curriculum. They state that the latter is a less familiar aspect and assumes that "teachers are lifelong students of their subjects ... " (ibid. 2001:951). Teachers must continue to increase their knowledge and remain updated with regard to changes in their disciplines:
"These two aspects of teacher development - one that focuses teachers' attention on the improvement of student learning, the other focused on the teacher as student of subject matter- do not always mix harmoniously. Often they do not mix at all" (Grossman et al 2001 :952). These two approaches are essentially a contrast between the promise of direct applicability and the long-term goal of personal intellectual renewal. Grossman et al suggest that "the challenge in creating ... community is to heed both aims simultaneously:
to maintain a focus on students while creating structures for teachers to engage as
learners with the subject matters they teach" (ibid.:952). These two critical foci of teacher learning must be carefully considered if there is to be any successful attempt to create and sustain 'teacher intellectual community'. Teacher community must be equally concerned with student learning and with teacher learning. They are at theessenceof teaching, and
they represent key ingredients in successful professional development. Grossman et al (2001) note that while these two foci can be at odds with each other, they can be heldina productive tension.
Inthe TEMS group, as will be seen presently, it was evident that not all teachers were equally interested in both foci. While some were interested in developing curriculum, others were there mainly to acquire subject matter knowledge. In the planning of the TEMS project, an attempt was made to weave both these foci into the agenda. However, the main thrust of the project was to develop subject matter knowledge in the EMS learning area.
I envisaged that the motivation for teachers to learn resided in teachers' developing and sustaining identities as knowers and as learners in the TEMS project. The motivation for teachers to learn centred mainly but not exclusively on developing and sustaining teachers' identities as learners in the TEMS community of practice. Itwas important to for me to develop a 'critical mass' (Spillane 2000) of EMS teacher leaders who would be able to convince other EMS teachers about the new EMS curriculum, its place in the school curriculum, and the importance of EMS knowledge for their pupils. I envisaged that peer encouragement would motivate participants to engage with meaningful EMS teaching.
I also hoped that teachers, trying out new ideas in their classrooms, with the support of their colleagues (addressing implementation difficulties) and observing the response of their own pupils would be another really important motivating factor and an incentive for teacher learning, an idea supported by McLaughlin and Talbert (2001). In becoming a part of the TEMS project, teachers would learn in a supportive community of practice and that it would translate into teachers creating supportive learning communities within their classrooms, and that they would be motivated by their own pupils' learning of the EMS learning area.
Teacher learning would be enabled through teacher reflection on existing knowledge, experience, and practice. It would involve challenging teachers' current thinking and guiding them towards new understandings. Learning would involve teachers in reconstructing their existing knowledge rather than the passive assimilation and
memorization of new knowledge. I hoped to use teachers' prior knowledge and practice as a central aspect in creating learning opportunities for this group of teachers.Itwould involve using teachers' existing conceptions and understandings to challenge and engage teachers' thinking and their practice.
The curriculum for teacher learning was developed from teachers' needs, as expressed by teachers and as observed by me in conjunction with the proposals in the new Revised National Curriculum Statement for EMS.