Thriving as a Professional Teacher

How to be a Principled Professional

Ian Luke, Jan Gourd

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN:
  9781138636088
• eBook ISBN:
  9781351796347
• Topic: Bildung
• Subtopic: Bildung Allgemein

Thriving as a Professional Teacher explores the tensions and balance between developing the classroom you know will be best for the children you teach, and facing external pressures such as Ofsted, performance management, Teacher Standards and the need to prepare children for SATs and other tests.

The book locates the professional in the political context before outlining the key challenges faced and experienced, and laying the foundations necessary for the professional to thrive. An expert team of contributors analyses the differences between professionalism and 'professionalisation', and emphasises the importance of promoting a collaborative, sharing culture to give you the knowledge needed to challenge and contest competing agendas. Topics covered include:

• understanding the impact of policy upon teachers and the teaching profession;
• developing a professional identity as a teacher;
• building resilience and a sense of wellbeing as a teacher;
• building and sustaining creativity in the curriculum;
• safeguarding young people;
• examining the impact of globalisation on educational practices.

With case studies, opportunities for reflection and clear chapter summaries woven throughout, Thriving as a Professional Teacher will help you to form a sustainable identity and to create a teaching and learning environment in which both teachers and students can thrive. It is an essential read for both trainee and practising teachers.

Part I

Locating the professional in the political context

1Policy, professionals and professionalism

Ian Luke, Tanya Ovenden-Hope and Alison Milner

Introduction

This chapter will explore the implications of policy upon teachers and their practice. Once policy is established it is, ‘intimately and deliberatively woven’ into the fabric of practice (Lea, 2013, p. 21). Policy will regulate content, curriculum, pedagogy and, therefore teachers. Through identifying political drivers, the intentions and ideology behind policy, it becomes clear that there is need for teachers to explicitly consider how they position themselves; they can either be positioned by policy or position themselves within policy (Lea, 2013). There are algorithms of accountability that put pressure on individuals and education communities alike (MacBlain, Dunn & Luke, 2017, p. 150) and it is imperative, therefore, that teachers are able to appreciate what is negotiable and what is non-negotiable within their own professional identity, but also for these teachers to be supported and sustained (Downey, Schaefer & Clandinin, 2014) in a collaborative culture such as a Professional Learning Community (PLC) (Owen, 2016).

By the end of the chapter you will:

•Develop an understanding of how policy and political discourse can have an impact upon practice and practitioners.

•Understand the need for educationalists to have a deep understanding of their own professional values and identity.

•Understand the importance of, but also difficulties in, developing a collaborative culture and Professional Learning Communities.

Contemporary political ideology

There is no doubting that education has gained significant attention in recent years. In principle, being viewed as high priority can lead to recognition, support and additional resources, but the implications of being high priority depend heavily upon the underpinning ideological drivers. With that, we need to be mindful of how Campbell-Barr and Leeson (2016) suggest that reasoning behind policies and regulation can often be hidden, which obviously is a worrying scenario in education if the reasoning and underpinning principles are not in alignment with the values and principles of teachers.

Notably, Moss (2015) highlights his discomfort with how education is being treated as a commodity, bound by the logics of, ‘marketisation, competition and cost-benefit analysis’ (Apple, 2013, p. 6). Such neoliberal philosophical drivers have meant that teachers are now faced with a clear performativity agenda with high-stakes accountability. Parents, schools, teachers and pupils are drawn into a performativity agenda that can undermine the essence and aims of education. Goodson’s (2000, 2003) notion of principled professionalism that holds cognitive and emotional dimensions of learning and teaching within a firm understanding of the moral and social purposes of education, is being squeezed by political drivers that focus on outcome and perceived quality without taking into account context, values, subjectivity and plurality (Moss & Dahlberg, 2008).

Performativity

Ball (2003, p. 216) defines performativity as ‘a technology, a culture and a mode of regulation that employs judgements, comparisons and displays as means of control, attrition and change – based on rewards and sanctions (both material and symbolic)’.

Wilkins (2010) notes that performative systems are characterised by three key strands of policy and practice. First, there is the use of audit or target data, which can potentially lead to risk-averse practice and the suppression of professional dialogue. It would appear axiomatic that targets drive behaviours, but this also means they can sometimes drive the wrong types of behaviour. An outcome-focused pedagogy can emerge (Ryan & Bourke, 2013) for example, as outputs are pushed to the foreground (Loh, 2013). It is possible that, ‘commitment, judgement and authenticity within practice are sacrificed for impression and performance’ (Ball, 2004, p. 146). Turner-Bisset (2007, p. 195, cited in Loh, 2013) confirms this, noting, ‘teachers compromise on the kinds of teaching in which they believe, and [enact] the kinds of teaching demanded by performativity’.

Second, there is the use of interventionist regulatory mechanisms, often high-stakes, with regular monitoring and inspection. Of course, high-stakes accountability is very different to high-stakes responsibility. Teachers should be responsible for their actions and the impact they are having upon children’s learning. However, this is different to feeling they have accountability but without control or autonomy. Far from driving standards of education forward, the implications of high stakes accountability mean innovative and creative teaching practices become squeezed, children’s experiences are narrowed and the very professional identity of teachers is threatened. The disconcerting irony is that high-stakes accountability clashes with what is hoped to be achieved. Take, for example, the current political drive for STEM education; the experiences and love of these subjects cannot easily be nurtured in early childhood due to the need for schools and teachers to focus on a narrow range of subjects that the school will be held accountable for nearing the end of primary education. Adams, Monahan and Wills (2015) have already highlighted how this threatens the more holistic education of a child. Of course, there are other consequences. Crocco and Costigan (2007, cited in Olivant, 2015) argue, for example, that struggling with high-stakes accountability without a sense of control or autonomy has particularly troubling implications for economically disadvantaged schools with higher percentages of at-risk students. They argue that while some teachers can be resilient to these pressures, others find these conditions too stressful and are leaving underperforming schools for settings where stakes are not so high in terms of student failure on standardised tests.

Pause to reflect

Consider four quadrants: high-stakes accountability, low-stakes accountability, high-stakes responsibility and, finally, low-stakes responsibility. Which of these situations do you feel would best optimise teacher effectiveness? What is the basis for your answer?

Third, performance systems are based within a market environment that enables the process of audit and inspection to reinforce the power of disciplinary actions; as Wilkins (2010, p. 398) states, ‘market levers are crucial to the neo-liberal model of governance’. Loh (2013) notes that schools as organisations are subject to these performativity pressures; relationships with parents have fundamentally changed, for example, with education being viewed as an exchange of services and goods. Parents have made an investment and are free to choose the schools they put their children in. As a result, schools try to stand out and seek to market themselves as value added (Loh, 2013, p. 163).

Professionalism

Wilkins (2010) also noted the impact, the potentially disempowering impact, between the demands of the performativity agenda and notions of professional autonomy. The regulatory gaze that emanates from the performativity agenda, can inevitably lead teachers to ‘conform to dominant constructions of professionalism’ (Osgood, 2006, p. 7). Ryan and Bourke (2013) also argue there is a move towards performative professionalism (Beck, 2008), where teachers are expected to demonstrate or perform so to enable the profession to be monitored and visible. The fear, as noted by Wilkins (2010, p. 393) is that, ‘political and public pressure for accountability has led to concern that teachers have become increasingly de-professionalised and compliant in the delivery of state-imposed initiatives’. Indeed, Loh (2013) notes performativity could require a potential sacrifice of professionalism for accountability and refers to Ball (2004) in defining a ‘post professional’; a teacher who can, ‘adapt to the necessities and vicissitudes of policy’ (p. 17) and who can ‘set aside personal beliefs and commitments and live an existence of calculation’ (Ball, 2003, p. 215). Beck (2008) attests to this, suggesting that such neoliberal policies can actually use the mask of re-professionalisation while initiating a process of de-professionalisation.

Pause to reflect

Evans (2008, p. 32–33) wrestles with the difficulties of defining professionalism, but suggests it may be useful to distinguish between professionalism that is demanded or requested (e.g., professional service level demands), professionalism that is prescribed (e.g., recommended professional service levels perceived by analysts) and professionalism that is enacted (e.g., professional practice as observed, perceived or interpreted from outside or within the professional group).

What are the differences in demanded, prescribed and enacted professionalism within teaching?

Finding a new professionalism

In order to challenge this scenario and an enforced performative or post view of professionalism, two key themes emerge. First, teachers need to position themselves to mediate the impact of political discourse on themselves and their identity (Lea, 2013) and second, there is a need to resist and counter political forces through collegiality and collectivism (Sachs, 2003).

Position in policy and professional identity

Notably, Meyerson (2004) used the term ‘tempered radical’ for those individuals who, because they understood the fact that organisations were continually evolving, were able to balance the need to be seen as corporate with the need to challenge and change. The implication is that such tempered radicals take advantage of opportunities to challenge, push boundaries, because they are explicitly aware of what is negotiable for them as individuals, and what is simply non-negotiable. Carlone, Haun-Frank and Kimmel (2010, p. 941) similarly noted how teachers worked as tempered radicals, ‘working the system’ as they struggled with the ‘many biases, contradictions and unintended consequences’ of education policy. It is suggested that such an approach can provide a clarity, strength, resilience and confidence in teachers enabling them maintain a sense of identity they are comfortable with and enabling them to thrive (MacBlain et al., 2017).

It is implied that those who embrace or simply fail to position themselves within the political discourse could become ‘tick-box professionals who present a veneer of quality’ (Ryan & Bourke, 2013, p. 421). It is worth noting that Wilkins’ small-scale study of newly qualified primary teachers showed signs of an emerging post-performative professionalism, where teachers, ‘fully embrace the accountability culture of teaching, less from a sense of democratic duty as public servants than simply because it is effective’ (Wilkins, 2010, p. 405, emphasis in original). Wilkins continued:

they have little patience for those amongst their experienced colleagues who they see as resistant to change, and are generally comfortable with the wider framework of performative management cultures – so long as they continue to enjoy the ‘micro-autonomy’ of the classroom.

(Wilkins, 2010, p. 405)

It has been argued that teachers have ‘restricted teacher professional identities’ due to the pressures of neoliberal subjectivities (Hall & McGinity, 2015, p. 2), which may help explain Wilkins’ (2010) findings. Nevertheless, there is the question whether such resilience would remain longer-term, and more importantly, how can resilience and wellbeing be optimised.

Downey et al. (2014) argue that it is too easy for early career teachers to lose resilience and it is imperative that they are encouraged to focus on sustaining moments as it is these moments, ‘that can turn into stories that will sustain them in teaching’ (Schaefer & Clandinin, 2011, p. 291). For Downey et al. (2014, p. 17), ‘the process of becoming a teacher is a means to live out who they are, and are becoming, not an end in and of itself’ and ‘becoming a particular kind of teacher was interwoven with becoming a particular kind of person’. As such, rather than assuming professionalism and professional development is about ‘skilling up’ to cope with issues of resilience and retention we should be attending to what sustains teachers. In their view, this will require reflective spaces where teachers can, ‘turn back upon the stories that brought them to becoming teachers’ (Schaefer & Clandinin, 2011, p. 293). In succinct terms Korthagen (2017) noted that while it may be an ‘inconvenient truth’ for policymakers, ‘the connection with the person of the teacher is crucial’ (p. 387), and as such, it is imperative that we examine this balance of personal and professional identity and how we can support and sustain teachers. We cannot hide from the fact that the National Union of Teachers (2017) reported that 45 per cent of young teachers have concerns over their mental health and are considering leaving the profession. Teachers need sustaining.

The Buffer-fly (Milner, 2017) is a useful concept to examine t...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• dedication
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• About the editors
• Notes on contributors
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part I Locating the professional in the political context
• Part II Challenges facing the professional
• Part III Laying the foundations for the thriving professional
• Index