Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]On: 18 February 2014, At: 21:45Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Studying Teacher Education: A journal of self-study ofteacher education practicesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cste20
Researching Teaching about Teaching: Self-Study ofTeacher Education PracticesJohn Loughrana Monash University , AustraliaPublished online: 17 Aug 2006.
To cite this article: John Loughran (2005) Researching Teaching about Teaching: Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices,Studying Teacher Education: A journal of self-study of teacher education practices, 1:1, 5-16
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17425960500039777
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Researching Teaching about Teaching:
Self-Study of Teacher Education
Practices
John Loughran*Monash University, Australia
The growth in the field of self-study of teacher education practices has largely been based on teacher
educators’ desire to better understand teaching and learning about teaching. This paper reviews
research over the last decade that has been important in shaping understandings of self-study and
the issues, concerns and agendas that are emerging as crucial to furthering the work. A major
purpose of the paper is to draw particular attention to ways of expressing the learning from self-study
so that it might be meaningful and applicable in practice for other teacher educators; especially in
relation to developing a pedagogy of teacher education.
The field of self-study of teacher education practices (S-STEP) has grown rapidly in
the last 10 years, inspiring many teacher educators to recognize and respond to the
growing importance of researching their own practice. Reports documenting the
learning from self-study have also begun to resonate with others in ways that have
influenced notions of the development of knowledge of teaching about teaching. Self-
study has thus been an important vehicle for many teacher educators to find
meaningful ways of researching and better understanding the complex nature of
teaching and learning about teaching.
In an extensive review of the literature Russell (2004) outlined a number of issues
and events that both paved the way for and influenced the nature of self-study.
As Russell makes clear, self-study has emerged from and been influenced by a range
of events and has built on the work of fields such as reflective practice (e.g., Brookfield,
1995; Dewey, 1933; Schon 1983, 1987), action research (e.g., Kemmis & McTaggart,
1988; McNiff, 1988; Mills, 2002) and practitioner research (e.g., Cochran-Smith &
Lytle, 1993; Dadds & Hart, 2001; Day, Calderhead, & Denicolo, 1993). In many
*Faculty of Education, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia. Email:
john.loughran@ education.monash.edu.au
Studying Teacher Education,
Vol. 1, No. 1, May 2005, pp. 5–16
ISSN 1742-5964 (print)/ISSN 1742-5972 (online)/05/010005-12
q 2005 Taylor & Francis Group Ltd
DOI: 10.1080/17425960500039777
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
ways then, self-study can be seen as a response to earlier calls for studies into teaching
about teaching involving teacher educators themselves (e.g., Lanier & Little, 1986).
Whitehead (1993) spoke of experiencing oneself as a living contradiction and this
idea has rung true for many as they have been confronted by the differences between
their practices and beliefs in teaching about teaching. The need to respond to
instances of being a living contradiction has inspired many teacher educators who
have sought to teach their student teachers in ways that they hope their student
teachers might then employ in their own teaching.
Despite the best intentions of those involved in self-study, one apparent difficulty is
implicit in the language itself. Self-study carries a tacit message that suggests
individuality. However, as Loughran and Northfield (1998, p. 7) make clear, self-
study inevitably requires involvement of others so that the learning outcomes are
much more than personal constructions of meaning; self-study must go beyond
personal reflections of practice so that the learning about teacher education practices
might truly resonate with others (e.g., see Loughran & Russell, 2002; Russell &
Korthagen, 1995; Samaras, 2002). Yet to understand what self-study is (and is not)
can be difficult (Bullough & Pinnegar, 2004), for self-study is not a “recipe” or
“procedure,” rather it is a methodology.
LaBoskey (2004) offers an insightful perspective into the methodology of self-study
by outlining what she sees as four integral aspects to the work. The first is that self-
study is improvement-aimed and that it “looks for and requires evidence of the
reframed thinking and transformed practice of the research, which are derived from
an evaluation of the impact of those development efforts” (p. 859). The second is the
interactive nature of self-study such that it demonstrates “interactions with our
colleagues near and far, with our students, with the educational literature, and with
our own previous work . . . to confirm or challenge our developing understandings”
(p. 859). The third is that “self-study employs multiple, primarily qualitative methods,
some that are commonly used in general educational research, and some that are
innovative . . . These methods provide us with opportunities to gain different, and thus
more comprehensive, perspectives on the educational processes under investigation”
(pp. 859–860; emphasis in original). The fourth revolves around the need to
“formalize our work and make it available to our professional community for
deliberation, further testing, and judgment” (p. 860). Taken together, these four
aspects demonstrate an expectation that the learning from self-study will not only be
informative to the individual conducting the research but also meaningful, useful and
trustworthy for those drawing on such findings for their own practice.
Catalyst for Self-Study
Many student teachers enter teacher education programs expecting to be able to be
told how to teach (Britzman, 1991; Hayward, 1997; Richardson, 1996). When they
become students of teaching (Bullough & Gitlin, 1995, 2001), the realization that
telling does not necessarily lead to learning can create a great sense of dissonance.
It seems obvious then that, in response to this sense of dissonance, teacher educators
6 J. Loughran
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
need to be good teachers of teaching so that the complex nature of teaching and learning
becomes more evident to their students of teaching. Yet being a good teacher of
teaching requires much more than just being a good teacher, and this is where self-
study begins to “bite” as an important shaping force in teacher education practices.
A great diversity of reports of self-study of teacher education practices exist (e.g.,
Cole & Finley, 1998; Kosnik, Freese, & Samaras, 2002; Richards & Russell, 1996)
and, for many involved in such work, the need for teaching and research to inform one
another is critical because it holds “invaluable promise for developing new
understandings and producing new knowledge about teaching and learning”
(Hamilton & Pinnegar, 1998, p. 243).
Heaton and Lampert (1993) draw attention to the importance of this issue when, in
reflecting on their concern to influence the nature of mathematics teaching in schools
through their work in teacher education they note that “we also need to learn about
how to teach teachers to put these [new and innovative] practices into effect and how
to prepare teacher educators to work in ways that are consonant with the kind of
teaching envisioned in reforms” (p. 43). Hence the interplay between teaching and
research stands out as an important component of teacher educators’ work and must
also be important in shaping one’s teaching about teaching.
Like Mitchell (1999) in science education, carrying a shared school and university
appointment afforded Lampert a professional role that included both teaching and
research in teacher education and school mathematics teaching. The collaboration
between Heaton and Lampert created opportunities to develop new relationships
between teaching, research and teacher education. “As a researcher, she [Heaton] used
her classroom as a site for inquiry into the practices of teaching and learning authentic
mathematics for understanding in school. . . These practices are unfamiliar . . . to most
teacher educators” (Heaton & Lampert, 1993, p. 44). Their work then came to offer
insights into teaching and learning about teaching that (at that time) were “little examined
and rarely written about” (Heaton & Lampert, 1993, p. 48). It is perhaps not surprising
then that, by examining their practice in the way they did, they came to see that:
It also provides insight into the multiple layers of teaching and learning involved in inventing
a new pedagogy of teacher education. Heaton, an experienced teacher, entered a doctoral
program in teacher education never expecting that her studies to become a teacher educator
would include an examination of her own teaching practice. It became necessary for her to
do such an examination when she realized that the pedagogy of mathematics she wanted to
teach teachers differed from her own practice of teaching mathematics. She could not live
with the dissonance. (Heaton & Lampert, 1993, pp. 76–77)
This sense of dissonance reminds us of Whitehead’s (1993) notion of experiencing
oneself as a “living contradiction.” However, recognizing when one is a living
contradiction and doing something about it are very different matters. For those who
do recognize and choose to respond to this sense of dissonance, self-study beckons.
Dinkleman (1999) found himself confronted by a sense of dissonance when his dual
roles as teacher educator and researcher collided and forced him to see anew that which
Researching Teaching about Teaching 7
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
hehad previouslynot seen;or perhapshadsimplynot questioned. He cameto seehis own
teaching through his students’ eyes when he was confronted by an alternative view of his
teaching in social studies method in a teacher education program. As a consequence, he
embarked on a self-study of his teaching about teaching because he felt a need to research
what had emerged for him as an instance of being a living contradiction. In so doing, he
hoped to become better informed about his practice.
Taken together, Heaton and Lampert (1993) and Dinkleman (1999) illustrated
that their learning about teaching could be (powerfully) articulated as a result of
purposefully unpacking their practice in response to the perplexities and uncertainties
of teaching about teaching. In so doing, they chose not to simply brush over the
uncertainty and move on; they chose instead to learn through interrogating the
uncertainty of practice in order to become better informed about practice. Through
such experience, it seems almost inevitable that a developing knowledge of teaching
about teaching will emerge. Such learning from experience then matters in terms of
the growth of a teacher educator beyond being a good teacher to becoming a good
teacher educator. A strong example of this type of learning is demonstrated by Kitchen
in this issue of Studying Teacher Education.
Becoming a Teacher Educator
Kitchen (2005) outlines his growth in understanding of teaching about teaching by
learning through an extensive self-study of his transition from student teacher, to
school teacher, teaching associate and finally to teacher educator. In his account, the
development of a knowledge of teacher education is clear, but more than this, the
explication of important aspects of teaching about teaching emerge as being critical in
shaping his pedagogy. Interestingly, although he is aware of the well-documented (but
often overlooked) needs, views and concerns of learners of teaching, it is only when he
purposefully addresses some of these concerns through his own practice that he
genuinely grasps what it means to teach about teaching.
Beginning teacher educators—for whom having been a good school teacher may well
have been important in influencing the move into academia—are often struck by the
change in the demands of teaching from school to university (Murray & Male, 2005).
They experience unanticipated changes and the demands of their role may initially cause
them to struggle with the expectations of university culture. A beginning teacher
educator who has been a successful school teacher may feel an overwhelming need to
offer recent and relevant experiences of teaching to student teachers so that what they are
doing (their teaching) will appear meaningful and relevant. As a consequence, an over-
reliance on sharing experiences from their own classroom practice and activities that
work can easily come to dominate practice. In many ways, such a response may appear
appropriate in terms of the immediate needs of student teachers. However, even though
such tips and tricks and stories of teaching experiences may be well received by student
teachers (and even expected by them), there is also the possibility that, without
appropriate support, mentoring and sharing of knowledge of practice from experienced
teacher educator colleagues, the tips and tricks may actually be perceived as all that is
8 J. Loughran
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
required of being a teacher educator. Sadly, it can also reinforce the impression that
teaching is only about tips and tricks and that entertaining students or having fun in
learning is all that teaching entails.
As Berry (2004) and Nicol (1997) have made abundantly clear, moving beyond a tips
and tricks approach to teaching about teaching is linked to an understanding of teaching
as being problematic. When teaching is viewed in this light, the need for teacher
educators to articulate and explicate the problems in their own teaching becomes
important so that student teachers may begin to look “beyond a recipe” approach to their
own learning about teaching. In accessing their teacher educators’ problems, puzzles and
curious situations, student teachers themselves then might begin to apprehend the
importance of pedagogical reasoning and begin to more fully conceptualize the value of
the knowledge that influences practice.
For teacher educators to develop their teaching about teaching and to begin to make the
problematic observable for their student teachers, they must publicly face their dilemmas
and tensions of practice and develop ways of explicitly sharing and responding to these
situations for their student teachers. Thus there is an overarching need for teacher
educators to pay attention to their own pedagogical reasoning and reflective practice and
to create opportunities for their student teachers to access this thinking about, and
practice of, teaching. Herein lies the distinction between teaching per se and teaching
about teaching.
There is little in the research literature to suggest that traditional teacher education
programs have had much influence on student teachers’ learning about teaching
(Korthagen et al., 2001) or in changing their beliefs (Wideen, Mayer-Smith, & Moon,
1998). This lack of impact is no doubt due, in part, to the ongoing reliance on the sacred
theory-practice story (Clandinin, 1995) experienced by students of teaching through what
Myers (2002) describes as the “teaching as telling, showing, guided practice approach”
to teacher education. Not surprisingly, the teacher educator who offers relevant and
engaging approaches to teaching rather than a “lecture on role-play” must surely be seen
by students of teaching as offering something real and meaningful for them to learn about
teaching. The danger though is that “teaching like me” or better developing the tips and
tricks of teaching can too easily be misinterpreted as the learning intention. Thus
developing one’s teaching about teaching so that the problematic nature of practice can
be seen and appropriately interrogated is fundamental to moving beyond a tips-and-
tricks approach. It is through this view of “grasping” and “unpacking” the problematic in
teaching about teaching that a knowledge of teacher education practices begins to be
recognized, responded to and explicitly developed. Through self-study, such learning
about teacher education can be enhanced.
Learning from Self-Study
If a knowledge of teaching about teaching is not explicitly valued by teacher educators
themselves, if the pursuit of the development of such knowledge is not a crucial aspect
of the work of teacher educators and if moving beyond a technical-rational approach
(Schon, 1983) to practice is not a goal in teaching about teaching, then there is little
Researching Teaching about Teaching 9
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
incentive to accept the challenge to embark on a self-study. Learning through self-
study in order to develop an articulated knowledge about practice is a further example
of the manner in which self-study moves beyond the individual self. Furthermore,
different ways of presenting the learnings from self-study exist in the literature and
three of these are briefly outlined next. Each offers interesting ways of portraying the
learning from self-study for others. Interestingly, in each of the cases outlined, the
studies from which the new knowledge evolved were conducted over considerable
periods of time, thus further reinforcing the longitudinal nature of many self-studies.
Axioms
Senese (2002), drawing on six years of data and involvement in the Action Research
Laboratory (ARL) at his school, noted that:
I have revisited data used to analyze the work of the teachers who are members of the
ARL. The data included qualitative analyses of their yearly written reports and interviews
that I had conducted with them. These sources provided a rich vein of information about
my interactions with ARL teachers and the organization that I created to support their
growth. My own reflections, coupled with professional readings, have led to a greater
awareness of how I created structures and a nurturing culture in which teachers could
grow professionally. These reflections and analyses have offered considerable
information about my own growth and, subsequently, the influence of that growth on
my teaching. As I taught my English course over the last two years, I noticed how I put my
beliefs and experiences as a staff developer into practice with my students. (p. 47)
The way in which Senese framed the learnings that resulted from his work in the ARL
revolved around the use of axioms described as “containing overtones of tension and
even irony” (p. 47). For Senese, axioms represented a way of portraying his learning
about practice such that they constantly reminded him of the development of his own
personal beliefs and how they were linked to changes in his behaviour and values in
teaching. His axioms are:
. Go slow to go fast.
. Be tight to be loose.
. Relinquish control in order to gain influence.
Senese goes on to explain in detail what each of these axioms means in terms of both
his teaching and his understanding of students’ learning, but it is in relation to what he
describes as “advancing our knowledge” that the importance of his learning for others
is best established. Senese acknowledges the problematic nature of teaching and the
importance of embracing the chaotic aspects of practice in order to develop, over time,
patterns that lead one to “generalize a little from . . . experiences” (p. 53). It is through
these axioms that his personal generalizations emerge in a way that permits others to
readily identify with them and therefore abstract from Senese’s learning to their own
experiences. As an important impetus for change, such knowledge carries a meaning
that directly relates to ways of conceptualizing one’s own practice and the possibilities
for bringing order to some of the “chaotic aspects” of teaching.
10 J. Loughran
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
Tensions
In an extensive review of the literature and links to longitudinal studies of her own
teaching about teaching (Berry, 2001), Berry (2004) describes tensions as “part of the
ever-present ambiguity of teachers’ (and teacher educators’) work” (p. 1313). Her use
of tensions as a frame for conceptualizing the problematic nature of practice helps to
formalize that which many teacher educators experience and readily identify with.
Tensions therefore offer a language for articulating a knowledge of teaching about
teaching that generally tends to be recognized as implicit in teacher educators’
practice. The use of tensions as a frame for articulation and analysis then offers one
way of making the tacit explicit. Her list includes the tensions between:
. Telling and growth
. Confidence and uncertainty
. Working with and against
. Discomfort and challenge
. Acknowledging and building upon experience
. Planning and being responsive
Berry’s description of Telling and Growth captures the essence of the problematic
nature of teaching by highlighting the importance of teacher educators purposefully
developing ways of teaching that do not rely on the simple transmission of information
but seek to create opportunities for meaningful learning about teaching experiences.
Through this tension she draws attention to the specialized skills associated with
responding appropriately to the needs of students of teaching while at the same time
pushing learners to move beyond a technical-rational approach to practice
(reminiscent of the development outlined by Kitchen, 2005).
The first areaof tension is embedded in teacher educators’ learninghow tobalance their own
desire to tell their student teachers about teaching with their understanding of the
importance of providing opportunities for students to learn about teaching themselves. The
tension is between informing and creating opportunities to reflect and self-direct and
between acknowledging student teachers’ needs and concerns and challenging them to
grow. Managing this tension is made all the more difficult by student teachers’ desire to be
told what works and by teacher educator’s desires to be seen as helpful, thereby fulfilling
traditional and subconscious perceptions of their role as teacher. (Berry, 2004, p. 1314)
Responses to questions such as these shed light on some of the most important
aspects of developing a pedagogy of teacher education; when these questions are
apprehended and investigated and the resulting knowledge is applied, quality teaching
about teaching is immediately recognizable.
Assertions
Loughran (in press) uses assertions as a way of capturing the learning from self-study and
portraying it in an accessible manner. His list of assertions (see Table 1) has been
developed through thedistillation of the learning fromexperience through self-studyover
Researching Teaching about Teaching 11
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
an extensive period of time (see, for example, Berry & Loughran, 2002; Loughran, 1997;
Loughran & Northfield, 1996) and has led to an accumulation of assertions related to
different aspects of teaching about teaching and teacher education program structure,
organization and intent. The purpose of these assertions, just like those of axioms and
tensions (above), is to try to capture some of the fundamental aspects of teaching about
teaching in a way that is identifiable and useable by other teachers of teaching. For
example, consider Assertion 7: Student teachers enter teacher preparation expecting to
be told how to teach, which is congruent with Berry’ (2004) tension between telling and
growth. It is interesting to ponder the ideas embedded in this assertion.
Assertion 7: Student-teachers enter teacher preparation programs expecting to be told
how to teach.
Teacher educators are constantly faced with finding a balance between responding to
student-teachers’ ‘real need’ to develop their skills of teaching and to empower them to
be active learners and developers of their own teaching. This is difficult for many
(student-teachers and teacher educators) to recognize and reconcile as they have a script
of teaching that has been shaped by their learning through an apprenticeship of observation
(Lortie, 1975). Experiencing the value of developing variations and extensions of others’
teaching ideas and approaches is important in facilitating a shift from the search for
recipes for teaching to individually meaningful and purposeful pedagogical reasoning.
(Loughran, in press)
Table 1. Assertions of teaching about teaching (Loughran, in press)
1. Learning about teaching needs to be embedded in personal experience.
2. Start teaching as if you’re half way through the subject.
3. Be confident to be responsive to possibilities in learning experiences.
4. An uncomfortable learning experience can be a constructive learning experience—risk-taking
matters.
5. Articulating personal principles of practice helps in better aligning practice and beliefs.
6. Teaching is about relationships.
7. Student-teachers enter teacher preparation programs expecting to be told how to teach.
8. Student-teachers’ needs and concerns shift during teacher preparation and the program
should be responsive to these changes.
9. The transition from student to teacher is complicated by situations that create cognitive
and affective dissonance that need to be acknowledged.
10. Quality learning requires learner consent.
11. Modeling is crucial—student-teachers learn more from what we do than what we say.
12. A shared experience with a valued other provides greater opportunity to reframe situations
and confront one’s assumptions about practice.
13. Challenging “telling as teaching” must occur at a personal level if the rhetoric of teacher
education is to be real for participants.
14. Teacher education programs should be coherent and holistic.
15. Teacher education programs need to acknowledge and value the important differences
between teaching and education as disciplines in their own right.
16. Teacher preparation is, by definition, incomplete.
17. Student-teachers are teachers, learners and researchers.
18. Teacher education requires a commitment to researching teaching and teaching research.
12 J. Loughran
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
As the explanation of this assertion suggests, the necessary knowledge and skills that
might be bound up in a pedagogy of teacher education that is responsive to this
assertion would clearly be embedded in the resultant practice, not defined by the
assertion. However, what the assertion does is to highlight important issues that need
to be understood, purposefully acknowledged and appropriately managed in the
teaching about teaching that is guided by the assertion. When recognized as
important, the assertion, just like the tension before it, is a reminder of the complex
nature of teaching and learning about teaching and creates a need to consciously
respond in appropriate ways “in practice.” This has the potential to encourage
learning from and through experience for all those involved, student teachers and
teacher educators alike. From this perspective, knowledge of practice is identifiable,
meaningful and applicable in teaching about teaching.
Conclusion
In considering that which might comprise a pedagogy of teacher education, it seems
wise to encourage self-study as a meaningful way for uncovering important facets of
the knowledge of practice. In so doing, teacher educators might then begin to capture,
unpack and portray the complexities of teaching and learning about teaching in ways
that might lead to deeper understandings of practice. Importantly, as well noted by
others (e.g., Clandinnin, 1995; Korthagen et al., 2001; Russell & Korthagen, 1995),
the learning of teaching about teaching needs to extend beyond personal knowledge
construction in order that a shared knowledge of teacher education practices might
begin to be articulated and developed.
Korthagen and Lunenberg (2004) describe what they see as important gains in
teacher education through connections to self-study: personal, institutional and
collective. They note that personal gains include the professional development of
individual teacher educators, institutional gains are clear in relation to reshaping
teacher education curricula and programs, and collective gains are evident in the
growing professional (international) community of teacher educators which benefits
from the ongoing interaction and sharing of insights. Overall, they conclude that “self-
study research contributes to a process of growing professionalism and empowerment
of the teacher educator community as a whole” (p. 446). This collective gain certainly
accords with what Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2004) recognize as important when
they note that self-study can be “a way to reinvent teacher education by continuously
interrogating one’s own practice and all of its underlying assumptions” (p. 607).
The challenge of self-study is for teacher educators to look into their practice with
new eyes so that their understandings of teaching and learning about teaching become
more meaningful and applicable in their own practice. The promise of self-study is
that through such endeavours the articulation of a pedagogy of teacher education
might emerge and be both meaningful and applicable in the practice of others in the
teacher education professional community.
Researching Teaching about Teaching 13
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
References
Berry, A. (2001, July). Making the private public: Using the WWW as a window into one teacher
educator’s thinking about her practice. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Study
Association of Teachers and Teaching, Faro, Portugal.
Berry, A. (2004). Self-study in teaching about teaching. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton,
V. K. LaBoskey & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher
education practices (pp. 1295–1332). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Berry, A., & Loughran, J. J. (2002). Developing an understanding of learning to teach in teacher
education. In J. Loughran & T. Russell (Eds.), Improving teacher education practices through self-
study (pp. 13–29). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Britzman, D. (1991). Practice makes practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bullough, R. V., Jr., & Gitlin, A. (1995). Becoming a student of teaching: Methodologies for exploring self
and school context. New York: Garland.
Bullough, R. V. Jr., & Gitlin, A. (2001). Becoming a student of teaching: Linking knowledge production
and practice, 2nd edn. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Bullough, R. V. Jr., & Pinnegar, S. E. (2004). Thinking about the thinking about self-study: An
analysis of eight chapters. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey & T. Russell
(Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices
(pp. 313–342). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Clandinin, D. J. (1995). Still learning to teach. In T. Russell & F. Korthagen (Eds.), Teachers who
teach teachers: Reflections on teacher education (pp. 25–31). London: Falmer Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2004). Practitioner inquiry, knowledge, and university culture.
In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of
self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 601–650). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Cole, A. L., & Finley, S. (Eds.) (1998). Conversations in community. Proceedings of the Second
International Conference of the Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices, Herstmonceux Castle,
East Sussex, UK. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University.
Dadds, M., & Hart, S. (Eds.) (2001). Doing practitioner research differently. London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Day, C., Calderhead, J., & Denicolo, P. (Eds.) (1993). Research on teacher thinking: Understanding
professional development. London: Falmer Press.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. New York: Heath and Co.
Dinkleman, T. (1999, April). Self-study in teacher education: A means and ends tool for promoting
reflective teaching. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Montreal. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED444936).
Hamilton, M. L., & Pinnegar, S. (1998). The value and promise of self-study. In M. L. Hamilton
(Ed.), Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self-study in teacher education (pp. 235–246). London:
Falmer Press.
Hayward, G. (1997). Principles for school focused initial teacher education: Some lessons from the
Oxford Internship Scheme. In T. Allsop & A. Benson (Eds.), Mentoring for science teachers
(pp. 11–26). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Heaton, R. M., & Lampert, M. (1993). Learning to hear voices: Inventing a new pedagogy of
teacher education. In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin & J. Talbert (Eds.), Teaching for
understanding: Challenges for policy and practice (pp. 43–83). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (Eds.) (1988). The action research reader, 3rd edn. Geelong, Victoria,
Australia: Deakin University Press.
Kitchen, J. (2005). Looking backwards, moving forward: Understanding my narrative as a teacher
educator. Studying Teacher Education, 1 (1), 17–30.
14 J. Loughran
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
Korthagen, F., & Lunenberg, M. (2004). Links between self-study and teacher education reform.
In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey & T. Russell (Eds.), The international
handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 421–450). Dordrecht:
Kluwer.
Korthagen, F. A. J., in cooperation with Kessels, J., Koster, B., Lagerwerf, B., & Wubbels, T. (2001).
Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Kosnik, C., Freese, A., & Samaras, A. (Eds.) (2002). Making a difference in teacher education
through self-study. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Self-Study of Teacher
Education Practices, Herstmonceux Castle, East Sussex, UK. Toronto: OISE/UT.
LaBoskey, V. K. (2004). The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings.
In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook
of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 817–870). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Lanier, J., & Little, J. W. (1986). Research in teacher education. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook
of research on teaching, 3rd edn. (pp. 527–560). New York: MacMillan.
Loughran, J. J., & Russell, T. (2002). Improving teacher education practices through self-study. London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Loughran, J. J. (1997). Teaching about teaching: Principles of practice. In J. Loughran, & T. Russell
(Eds.), Teaching about teaching: Purpose, passion and pedagogy in teacher education (pp. 57–69).
London: Falmer Press.
Loughran, J. J. (in press) Knowledge construction and learning to teach about teaching.
In D. Beijaard, P. C. Meijer, G. Morine-Dershimer & H. Tillema (Eds.), New directions in
teachers’ working and learning environment. Berlin: Springer.
Loughran, J. J., & Northfield, J. R. (1996). Opening the classroom door: Teacher, researcher, learner.
London: Falmer Press.
Loughran, J. J., & Northfield, J. R. (1998). A framework for the development of self-study practice.
In M. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Reconceptualizing teaching practice: Self-study in teacher education
(pp. 7–18). London: Falmer Press.
McNiff, J. (1988). Action research: Principles and practice. London: Routledge Press.
Mills, G. E. (2002). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
Prentice Hall.
Mitchell, I. (1999). Bridging the gulf between research and practice. In J. Loughran (Ed.),
Researching teaching: Methodologies and practices for understanding pedagogy (pp. 44–64).
London: Falmer Press.
Murray, J., & Male, T. (2005). Becoming a teacher educator: Evidence from the field. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 21 (2), 125–142.
Myers, C. B. (2002). Can self-study challenge the belief that telling, showing, and guided-practice
constitute adequate teacher education? In J. Loughran & T. Russell (Eds.), Improving teacher
education practices through self-study (pp. 130–142). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Nicol, C. (1997). Learning to teach prospective teachers to teach mathematics: The struggles of a
beginning teacher educator. In J. Loughran & T. Russell (Eds.), Teaching about teaching
(pp. 95–116). London: Falmer Press.
Richards, J., & Russell, T. (1996). Empowering our future in teacher education. The proceedings of the
First International Conference of the Self-Study of Teacher Education Practices, Herstmonceux
Castle, East Sussex, England, UK. Kingston, ON: Queen’s University.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.),
Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 102–119). New York: Macmillan.
Russell, T. (2004). Tracing the development of self-study in teacher education. In J. J. Loughran,
M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of
teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 1192–1210). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Researching Teaching about Teaching 15
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
Russell, T., & Korthagen, F. (Eds.) (1995). Teachers who teach teachers: Reflections on teacher
education. London: Falmer Press.
Samaras, A. (2002). Self-study for teacher educators. New York: Peter Lang.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic
Books.
Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning
in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Senese, J. (2002). Opposites attract: What I learned about being a classroom teacher by being a
teacher educator. In J. Loughran & T. Russell (Eds.), Improving teacher education practices
through self-study (pp. 43–55). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Whitehead, J. (1993). The growth of educational knowledge: Creating your own living educational
theories. Bournemouth, UK: Hyde Publications.
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning to
teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research,
68, 130–178.
16 J. Loughran
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mos
kow
Sta
te U
niv
Bib
liote
] at
21:
45 1
8 Fe
brua
ry 2
014
