Transcript Professionalism, Professionality and Professional Development

Theory to practice in
professional development:
illustrating and testing an essentialist or
quidditative model through practical
examples
paper presented at ECER 2009, University of Vienna, within
the symposium:
Examining Teachers’ Professional Development:
perspectives from the UK, Switzerland and Belgium
Wednesday 30th September
Dr Linda Evans
School of Education, University of Leeds, UK
[email protected]
Teachers talking:
which of these represents professional
development?
Anne:
 ‘It was a brilliant course! The tutors were
really good and gave us some excellent
ideas for different ways of using the maths
equipment … and I’ve tried some of them
out already and the children have loved
them. Also, we learned a lot just through
exchanging ideas with the other teachers on
the course.’
Teachers talking:
which of these represents professional
development?
Mark:
 ‘I used to want to leave teaching to
become a HE lecturer. Now I’ve
changed my mind and want to be a
headteacher. I used to think being a
headteacher would be too stressful for
me – with all the interpersonal conflict
that it brings. Now I believe I could
cope with that aspect of it.’
Teachers talking:
which of these represents professional
development?
Hilary:
 ‘Since our new boss was appointed, there’s
now, for me, more job satisfaction in what
I’m doing. I feel I’ve got more direction and
purpose than I had before, when I wasn’t
sure what I was doing. And that’s quite
fulfilling … plus the fact that my new boss
has got direction, and that helps as well … I
do feel, at times, more constructively used
than I did.’
Professional development:
Linda Evans’s definition
‘Umbrella’ definition:
Professional development is the process
whereby people’s professionalism, or
professionality, or professional practice
may be considered to be enhanced, with
a degree of permanence that exceeds
transitoriness.
Professionality orientation: teachers
Eric Hoyle, 1975
‘Restricted’ professionality
‘Extended’ professionality

Skills derived from experience


Perspective limited to the
immediate in time and place


Introspective with regard to
methods


Value placed on autonomy


Infrequent reading of
professional literature
Teaching seen as an intuitive
activity



Skills derived from a mediation
between experience & theory
Perspective embracing the
broader social context of
education
Methods compared with those
of colleagues and reports of
practice
Value placed on professional
collaboration
Regular reading of
professional literature
Teaching seen as a rational
activity
The ‘restricted’-’extended’ teacher
professionality continuum
Professional development:
an essentialist or quidditative model
(Evans, 2009, work in progress)
professional
development
intellectual
development
attitudinal
development
functional
development
comprehensive
change
perceptual
change
processual
change
epistemological
change
evaluative
change
procedural
change
rationalistic
change
motivational
change
productive
change
Definitions of the components:
functional, attitudinal and intellectual development

Functional development is the process whereby people’s
professional performance is modified with the result that her/his
professionalism, professionality or professional practice may be
considered to be enhanced, with a degree of permanence that
exceeds transitoriness.

Attitudinal development is the process whereby people’s workrelated attitudes are modified with the result that her/his
professionalism, professionality or professional practice may be
considered to be enhanced, with a degree of permanence that
exceeds transitoriness.

Intellectual development is the process whereby people’s
professional-related knowledge, understanding or reflective
or comprehensive capacity or competence are modified with
the result that her/his professionalism, professionality or
professional practice may be considered to be enhanced, with a
degree of permanence that exceeds transitoriness.
The hierarchy of the definitions

Each of the three componential definitions:



functional development
attitudinal development
intellectual development
lies within the over-arching definition of professional
development:

professional development is the process whereby people’s professionalism,
or professionality, or professional practice may be considered to be
enhanced, with a degree of permanence that exceeds transitoriness.

The ‘change’ referred to is, therefore, change for the
better.

I define professional practice as: all professional- or
work- or work context-related physical or mental
activity.
Dissecting professional development:
the change dimensions









Comprehensive change - change in relation to what people know or
understand
Epistemological change - change in relation to the knowledge base
upon which people draw and which they apply to their practice
Rationalistic change - change relating to the extent of and the nature
of the reasoning that people apply to their practice
Perceptual change - change in relation to people’s perceptions and
beliefs
Evaluative change - change to people’s professional- or practicerelated values, including the minutiae of what they consider important
Motivational change - change to people’s motivation and levels of job
satisfaction and morale
Processual change - change in relation to the processes that
constitute people’s practice – how they ‘do’ or ‘go about’ things
Procedural change - changes to procedures that people utilise or apply
within their practice
Productive change - changes to what people achieve, produce or ‘do’
Evaluating my model:
Three key questions

How sound is the componential structure within
the model?

How sound is the classification and
classificatory terminology?

How useful is the model as an analytical
framework?
Testing the model
Evidential sources:

Transcripts of research interviews with 21
English primary school teachers

The research focus was not professional
development


limited dataset
My own experiences as a schoolteacher and as
an academic
Amanda













Teacher at Rockville County Primary School
At her job interview she asked about remedial teaching support –
she was told that the deputy head, Margaret, came into
classrooms to do small group remedial teaching.
This didn’t happen.
Amanda questioned the headteacher, Geoff, about it.
He referred Amanda to Margaret.
Amanda spoke to Margaret about it.
Nothing happened.
Amanda told Geoff of this.
Geoff said he would mention it to Margaret.
Margaret came and did small group work on one occasion. She
promised to return the next day to continue with it.
Margaret failed to return ever again.
Amanda told Geoff of this.
Nothing was done about the problem
Amanda’s comments

‘I didn’t know how to go about broaching this and so
I did it, sort of … generally, in conversation with
Geoff Collins, and he said I’d only to mention it [to
Margaret] and it would be attended to. Now, I
mentioned it and nothing was done about it. …
Nothing was done about it and so, as time went on,
I became more and more open in what I was saying
to him [Geoff] and less subtle, I suppose.’

‘I began to realise then that … er … it was [just] me
and the children.’
Amanda’s comments

‘Perhaps I was expecting too much of the system … and
yet, in my heart of hearts, I knew that that’s how it could be
… particularly when, in a school like that, there was so
much back-up available. The children could have been
helped more … the staff could’ve been helped more …
and it was more about administrative expediency – not
offending those who were easily offended.… What I
should’ve done … I should’ve asked for an adviser [to
come] in school, and I should’ve done it through the
adviser. Because I understand the advisory service now,
that’s what I should’ve done. I should’ve asked to see my
general adviser, discussed with the general adviser what
the situation was, and told the general adviser that I was
also writing to the senior adviser.’
Amanda’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?
Functional development:

processual change – the processes that she adopted
in collegial communication and interaction:
• ‘I became more and more open in what I was saying to him
[Geoff] and less subtle, I suppose’

procedural change – the procedures that she
adopted for dealing with a problem:
• going through the hierarchy in order to express her
dissatisfaction
• accepting self-sufficiency as the best course of action:
• ‘I began to realise then that … er … it was [just] me and the
children.’
Amanda’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?
Intellectual development:

comprehensive change – she increased her
understanding of the micro-politically-determined power
structure and operational norms that prevailed in her
school:
• ‘The children could have been helped more … the staff could’ve
been helped more … and it was more about administrative
expediency – not offending those who were easily offended.’

comprehensive change – she increased her
understanding of systemic procedures and processes
that she could have used to her advantage, if she had
been aware of them earlier:
• ‘I should’ve asked for an adviser [to come] in school, and I
should’ve done it through the adviser. … Because I understand
the advisory service now, that’s what I should’ve done. I
should’ve asked to see my general adviser, discussed with the
general adviser what the situation was, and told the general
adviser that I was also writing to the senior adviser.’
Amanda’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?
Attitudinal development:

perceptual change - perception of her own
agential capacity and potential for applying
her increased knowledge and
understanding of procedures, and
designated roles and responsibilities, to
initiate change that would impact upon her
professional practice:
• ‘Because I understand the advisory service now,
that’s what I should’ve done.’
The change dimensions:
which ones are unaccounted for?









Comprehensive change
Epistemological change
Rationalistic change
Perceptual change 
Evaluative change
Motivational change
Processual change 
Procedural change 
Productive change

Hilary’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?

‘Personally, for me, there’s now more job
satisfaction in what I’m doing … in direction and
purpose I feel I’ve got more than I had at the
beginning, when I wasn’t sure what I was doing.
And that’s quite fulfilling … plus the fact that my
boss has got direction, and that helps as well …
y’know what I mean? … I do feel, at times,
more constructively used than I did.’
Hilary’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?
Attitudinal development:

motivational change – her job satisfaction
and motivation have increased as a result
of her feeling that she is being given more
direction:
• ‘there’s now more job satisfaction in what I’m
doing … in direction and purpose I feel I’ve got
more than I had at the beginning, when I wasn’t
sure what I was doing. And that’s quite fulfilling.’
The change dimensions:
which ones are unaccounted for?









Comprehensive change
Epistemological change
Rationalistic change
Perceptual change 
Evaluative change
Motivational change 
Processual change 
Procedural change 
Productive change

Mark’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?

‘I’m back in the groove of wanting to get on, as a
deputy head, and become a headmaster, which I
didn’t want to do when I spoke to you. The
trouble was, I didn’t fancy the social problems
and the nastiness involved … and parental
conflict. But now I feel I’ve got the personality …
that won’t be a problem – I can easily get over
that. The thing that I feel now … I feel that it’s
always been there, but I have the confidence to
know better now.’
Mark’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?
Attitudinal development:

motivational change – he is re-motivated to
become a headteacher:
• ‘I’m back in the groove of wanting to get on … as a
deputy head, and become a headmaster.’

perceptual change - changes to his perception of
his own potential agential influence on his
interaction with other adults, including parents
and teachers:
• ‘I didn’t fancy the social problems and the nastiness
involved … and parental conflict. But now I feel I’ve got
the personality … that won’t be a problem’

evaluative change – his values have changed in
relation to his ideal job; headship has increased in
value to him
Mark’s comments:
what evidence of professional development?
Intellectual development:

rationalistic change – he has examined the
rationale underpinning his earlier disinclination
toward becoming a headteacher, has found it
wanting, and has re-rationalised his future career
plans:
• ‘The trouble was, I didn’t fancy the social problems and
the nastiness involved … and parental conflict. But now I
feel I’ve got the personality … that won’t be a problem –
I can easily get over that. The thing that I feel now … I
feel that it’s always been there, but I have the
confidence to know better now.’
The change dimensions:
which ones are unaccounted for?









Comprehensive change
Epistemological change
Rationalistic change 
Perceptual change 
Evaluative change 
Motivational change 
Processual change 
Procedural change 
Productive change

Linda Evans’s professional
development experiences
Functional development:

productive change - becoming computerliterate and using ICT as a central resource in
my work:
• greater productivity and efficiency
Intellectual development:

epistemological change – transformation from
a ‘restricted’ to an ‘extended’ professional:
• acceptance of educational research/ scholarship as
a valid basis for practice and professional
knowledge
Addressing the three key
questions

How sound is the componential structure
within the model?

How sound is the classification and
classificatory terminology?

How useful is the model as an analytical
framework?
How sound is the componential
structure within the model?

Have I omitted any components?
All 9 are supported by evidence.
 Impossible to know if any are omitted

• Any theory represents propositional
knowledge.

Have I included any components that
should not be there?

It is possible that overlap occurs.
• The issue of potential overlap relates to the
soundness of the classification and
classificatory terminology.
How sound is the classification
and classificatory terminology?









Change dimensions that are currently missing will always be
identifiable.
The key issue is whether or not these share the same classificatory
level as those already identified.
Potentially missing are, for example:
 beliefs
 self-efficacy
 self-esteem
I consider these to be subsidiary elements of - and therefore to
represent a different classificatory level from - perceptual change.
Ensuring the equivalence of the classificatory levels represented by
the components is challenging.
I am uncertain of having got it right at this stage.
Can some of my components be conflated?
Can each be justified in its own right?
Is epistemological change, for example, a sub-component of
comprehensive change or of perceptual change?
Professional development:
an alternative essentialist or quidditative model
professional
development
intellectual
development
attitudinal
development
functional
development
comprehensive
change
perceptual
change
processual
change
rationalistic
change
evaluative
change
procedural
change
motivational
change
productive
change
Professional development:
an alternative essentialist or quidditative model
professional
development
comprehensive
development
attitudinal
development
functional
development
epistemological
change
perceptual
change
processual
change
rationalistic
change
evaluative
change
procedural
change
motivational
change
productive
change
Professional development:
an essentialist or quidditative model
(Evans, 2009, work in progress)
professional
development
intellectual
development
attitudinal
development
behavioural
development
analytical
change
perceptual
change
processual
change
epistemological
change
evaluative
change
procedural
change
rationalistic
change
motivational
change
productive
change
competential
change
How useful is the model as an
analytical framework?
I have demonstrated the model’s potential and capacity for:


‘dissecting’ empirical evidence of professional
development ‘episodes’ that have occurred;
illuminating the nature and foci of such ‘episodes’.
The model may also potentially be used for examining and
scrutinising:



the comparative impact of specific ‘kinds’ (i.e.
dimensions) of professional development;
the comparative prevalence of specific ‘kinds’ (i.e.
dimensions) of professional development within
designated provision of professional development
opportunities;
the componential composition of effective (and
ineffective) professional development initiatives.
Linda Evans
School of Education, University of Leeds,
[email protected]