Teacher Educators' Professional Learning in Communities

Linor L. Hadar, David L. Brody, Linor Hadar, David Brody

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781138183803
• eBook ISBN: 9781317292500
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Teacher Educators' Professional Learning in Communities explores teacher educators' professional development in the communal model of learning. Learning in groups has proved to be a major avenue for supporting such development and change among teachers and other professions, but one which has received sparse attention with regards to teacher educators' development. This book aims to examine such communities in order to identify factors that promote or hinder professional learning for teacher educators.

Blending research on communal learning with seven years of practical experience in these contexts, the authors present their analysis of the communal professional development process and provide a conceptual basis for understanding this type of professional learning for teacher educators. The book addresses organizational aspects of teacher educators' learning in communities, such as creating a safe environment, group reflection, feedback and discussion about student learning. Personal professional learning aspects are also explored, including the reduction of personal isolation, the process of transition towards change, and withdrawal from the goals of the community. Finally, influences and implications for professional learning among teacher educators are discussed.

Teacher educators stand at the crux of the entire educational enterprise, because of their responsibility in training the next generation of teachers. As such, their professional development is increasingly important in promoting and advancing educational practice. Integrating current literature with pictures of practice about the use of the communal model in professional development in educational settings, it will be of key interest to researchers and postgraduate students in several fields: professional development, teacher educators, and communities of learners. Practitioners who are involved with the professional development of teacher educators will also find this book extremely useful.

Part 1
Building and exploring communities for professional learning of teacher educators

1
The use of communities for the professional development of teacher educators

In the introductory chapter we have introduced the many forms and processes through which teacher educators engage in continued professional learning, the communal model being one model which has gained popularity in recent years. This is the model that we explore in depth in this book. Its popularity stems from much evidence regarding its capacity to advance professional learning. As such, communal learning is thought to be more significant than the traditional form of professional development (Darling-Hammond, Wei, Andree, Richardson, & Orphanos, 2009; Lieberman & Mace, 2008).

Why is communal learning considered more effective? What are the benefits of this model for professional learning? In this chapter we explore the literature on professional learning within the communal model, thereby providing insight into these questions. To meet this goal we will first outline some theoretical foundations of communal learning, and then expand on the concept by describing two basic structures of the communal model for professional learning among educators. We will conclude the chapter by outlining some of the research evidence regarding the benefits of communal learning in educational settings in general and in the professional learning of teacher educators in particular.

Theoretical explanations for the value of communal learning can be traced back to the work of Vygotsky (1978), who regarded individual cognition as social in origin (Wertsch, 1998). This approach views professional learning as socially and culturally situated. Instead of focusing on the solitary practitioner whose professional learning is segmented from colleagues, the collaboration context emphasizes the shared work setting. In this context new knowledge and ideas emanate from interaction with others, while individuals learn, change, and develop as they negotiate meaning through collaboration. The participation metaphor characterizes this communal conception of learning (Sfard, 1998), assuming its inextricable bond with identity formation. Positing that new knowledge emanates from interaction, the notion of distributed cognition (Salomon, 1993; Vrasidas & Zembylas, 2004) provides further basis for the benefits of communal learning. This view stresses the accumulation of knowledge by a social group and the ability of each member of that group, from his own perspective, to access as well as contribute to this body of knowledge.

The social-cultural tradition also forms the basis of Lave and Wenger’s (1991) notion of situated learning. They proposed a theory of learning to explain how context influences human social endeavors and generates meaning, practice, and identity. This theoretical view emphasizes the relational interdependency between the individual and his world, including activity, meaning, cognition, learning, and knowing (Lave, 1991). As such this perspective views the cognitive focus in learning to be misleading as it excludes the contextual and social nature necessary for learning to take place (Handley, Sturdy, Fincham, & Clark, 2006). Thus, cumulative knowledge is acquired through networks of participation, “not in an individual mind” (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 15). Similar to the notion of distributed cognition, differences of perspective are valued as essential components of the learning process. However, Lave (1991) goes beyond this notion of distributed cognition by claiming that learning, thinking, and knowing are the actual relations among people when they engage in activity arising from their socially and culturally structured world. According to this theory, learning is situated in physical and social contexts, is social in nature, and is distributed across the individual, other persons, and various artifacts such as physical and symbolic tools (Putnam & Borko, 2000; Salomon, 1993).

Situating learning as shared experience has provided fertile ground on which multiple forms of professional learning in communities have emerged, each characterized by a profile of goals, format, and time frame. While some of these communal models were developed for application across the professions, many have been implemented for teachers’ learning and used in the professional development of faculty in higher education as well as among teacher educators. In these contexts the different models of professional learning communities are places where educators interact with a particular context to develop and arrive at individual visions of teaching and learning. In this manner the contextualized and collective work of the group creates the learning environment for each individual (Vescio & Adams, 2015).

Whereas each communal model has its own specific characteristics, most rely in one way or another on one of the other most well-known paradigms of learning in community: the community of practice and the community of learners models. In many cases communal learning endeavors draw upon a combination of the two, making it difficult to identify which aspects are taken from each model. We suggest that even when the boundaries of these two models are blurred, the professional learning that takes place in such endeavors is both significant and worthy of our attention. Because these two paradigms stand at the core of many professional learning communities, understanding their essential nature is important for appreciating professional learning in these contexts, even if the actual learning activities cannot be ascribed to one or the other.

The “community of practice” and “community of learning” models for professional learning

Based on their concept of situated learning Lave and Wenger (2002) proposed the term “community of practice” as a model for professional learning. In this paradigm a network of practitioners that share professional interests in a particular domain come together in order to address problems and issues that arise in their practice. The participants deepen their knowledge and expertise through ongoing interaction towards a common goal such as professional problem solving and improvement of practice (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). As such, the context, social practice, and activities are fundamentally interwoven with cognition and learning (Hung & Chen, 2001), making professional learning in this model “an ongoing, collective responsibility rather than an individual one” (Opfer & Pedder, 2011, p. 285).

Wenger (1999) put forward three dimensions of a community of practice: mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and repertoire of discourse and action. The mutual engagement of participants involves interaction between colleagues who have both different as well as overlapping areas of competence. This dimension also brings forward the notion of peripheral participation, which refers to engaging people who are on the sidelines, both newcomers and members of lower professional status, to become integral active participants, thus integrating them into the organization. Wenger’s second dimension, joint enterprise, refers to participants holding both shared goals and mutual accountability. The third dimension refers to a stored repertoire of discourse and action that includes habits and practices that are particular to the organizational culture and used among participants in the community of practice.

Although Lave and Wenger (2002) developed this model in the context of the business world, it has been widely applied in educational settings, particularly for teacher learning. This type of learning is understood as a “process of increasing participation in the practice of teaching, and through this participation, a process of becoming knowledgeable in and about teaching” (Adler, 2000, p. 37). The building blocks of such communities of practice include common features such as meeting regularly over an extended period of time, sharing common values and goals, and engaging in collaboration and critique of each other’s work. This format enables teachers to work together to refine their teaching, which in turn contributes to improving learning (Hung & Chen, 2001).

The community of practice model has also been applied in higher education contexts using different names and formats. One example is the Faculty Learning Community. These communities can be organized around a particular group of faculty, or focused on a topic that attracts faculty from a variety of backgrounds (Cox, 2004). They are characterized by “a continuous process of learning and reflection, supported by colleagues, with an intention of getting things done” (McGill & Beaty, 2001, p. 11). Many of these communities are aimed at the improvement of college teaching (Cox, 2004). These faculty forums have been established both on campus as well as in virtual formats (Vaughan & Garrison, 2005). The virtual format tends to provide rich resources in a variety of domains for individual faculty members rather than serving the functions of joint problem solving.

Another application of the community of practice model in higher education contexts is termed the Thinking Community (Eddy & Mitchell, 2012). Because of its communal nature and its emphasis on the university teaching domain, this model fits the community of practice model. Thinking Communities provide faculty with an organized framework in which they can challenge basic assumptions and engage in a professional learning process emphasizing intentional reflection.

More generic applications of the community of practice model in the teacher education context are also found in the literature. Some give specific attention to teacher educators participating in communities of practice as key players in improving the quality of teacher education, while others use this model in examining the role of teacher educators and their professional learning (Sheehy, Bohler, Richardson, & Gallo, 2015). Considering the complexity of their practice, as discussed in the introductory chapter, the use of communities of practice specifically with teacher educators is often aimed at the development of their professionalism and their professional capital (Parker, Patton, & Tannehill, 2012). As such, this professional learning format is thought to promote confidence among the participants while impacting their practice (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012). When aimed at developing professional capital, the community of practice focuses on continuous, collaborative involvement and the development of expertise over time to make wise decisions about students, curriculum, and instruction (Sheehy et al., 2015).

A second model of learning in community that has garnered widespread interest is the “community of learners” paradigm. This model is distinguished from the community of practice in that its focus need not be on practice itself. This model of communal learning denotes a small group of people with a clear sense of membership and common goals, and who use the opportunity to learn together through extensive interaction that deepens knowledge and understanding through joint reflection and problem solving (Cox, 2004). As such it provides a means of sharing professional knowledge and inquiry into different areas of interest commonly held by members of the community (Eraut, 2002). In these communities, all members of the group are learners, and the group is organized to learn as a whole system (Cox, 2004).

Despite the nuanced theoretical difference in focus between the community of learners and the community of practice models, distinguishing between the two in the educational context is arduous and perhaps unnecessary. It seems that both share the premise that educators can learn as well as teach in their work setting (Bolam et al., 2005). Moreover, within workplace settings in general, and in educational contexts in particular, learning often takes the form of interaction with other people as well as dealing with overcoming challenges posed by the actual practice. As such, when implemented in real-life contexts those two models are often interrelated, while research has not demonstrated how activities within these models promote different forms of learning (Eraut, 2002).

Indeed, our comprehensive literature search has failed to identify any attempt to distinguish the two models. Nevertheless, the general notion of professional learning as a social entity has been extensively studied and empirically documented in educational research (e.g., Bolam et al., 2005; Fuller, Hodkinson, Hodkinson, & Unwin, 2005). This body of research brings to the fore some important aspects of learning in communities.

What does research say about learning in communities?

As mentioned above, learning in various community settings has been extensively researched. It is beyond the scope of our book or this chapter to present a comprehensive review of the multiple effects of learning in communities in the different contexts in which it was implemented. Moreover, very little of this literature has addressed the implementation of the communal model for the professional learning of teacher educators as a target population. This is the focus of our book. Thus, we have chosen to outline ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of tables and figure
• Acknowledgements
• About the authors
• Introduction: Teacher educators and their professional learning
• PART 1 Building and exploring communities for professional learning of teacher educators
• PART 2 Organizational features of professional learning communities for teacher educators
• PART 3 Teacher educators’ individual processes within the community
• PART 4 Influences and implications for professional learning among teacher educators
• Index