Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [University of Liverpool]On: 04 October 2014, At: 15:57Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Teaching EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cted20
School‐based Research and ProfessionalLearning: An innovative modelto promote teacher professionaldevelopment in ChinaLingyuan Gu a & Jie Wang aa Shanghai Academy of Educational Sciences , ChinaPublished online: 24 Jan 2007.
To cite this article: Lingyuan Gu & Jie Wang (2006) School‐based Research and ProfessionalLearning: An innovative model to promote teacher professional development in China , TeachingEducation, 17:1, 59-73, DOI: 10.1080/10476210500528079
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10476210500528079
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Teaching EducationVol 17, No. 1, March 2006, pp. 59–73
ISSN 1047-6210 (print)/ISSN 1470-1286 (online)/06/010059–15© 2006 School of Education, University of QueenslandDOI 10.1080/10476210500528079
School-based Research and Professional Learning: An innovative model to promote teacher professional development in China1
Lingyuan Gu and Jie Wang*Shanghai Academy of Educational Sciences, ChinaTaylor and Francis LtdCTED_A_152790.sgm10.1080/10476210500528079Teaching Education1047-6210 (print)/1470-1286 (online)Original Article2006Taylor & Francis171000000March [email protected]
In-service teacher education in China has traditionally been mainly lecture-centred, theory-orien-tated, and experience-led. For various contemporary reasons such an approach may not be effec-tive since it is unlikely to provide a context in which teachers are able to put educational theoriesinto practice. “Action Education”, a school-based research and professional learning approach thathas been widely implemented in schools in China for a number of years, is an innovative modelthat aimed at promoting teacher professional development on the basis of action learning. Itfocuses on collaborative learning, learning from experience, and exploring the constructiveconnection between action and reflection. The model is an attempt to bridge the gap betweentheory and practice, to develop teachers’ practical wisdom and to promote teacher professionaldevelopment in daily practice. This research, originating from the Qingpu Experiment 20 yearsago, was completed by the “action education” research team in the process of undertaking researchprojects in the area of in-service teacher education in Shanghai and nationwide in China.
Introduction
A changing view of learning and teaching has been prevalent around the world, witha greater emphasis on social and constructivist dimensions. In line with such a globaltrend, China has taken the initiative to introduce large-scale curriculum reform toprovide quality education. Instead of merely transmitting a fixed body of knowledge,new curricula stress the importance of integrating “knowledge and skills”, “processand method” as well as “emotions, attitudes, and values”. To make the curriculumreform successful, teacher professional learning is seen as crucial. Sustainable
*Corresponding author. No. 21 Cha Ling Road (N), Shanghai China. Email: [email protected]
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
60 L. Gu and J. Wang
curriculum reform requires the empowerment of teachers to re-examine professionalidentities and develop professional expertise. Teachers need to reflect on theireducational beliefs, grapple with their own vision of the curriculum change anddevelop the ability to actualize it in their own practices. “Reflective teaching” and“research-based teaching” have thus been promoted.
One of the most commonly adopted ways in China to help the large number ofpresent teachers understand and interpret the new curricula is through in-serviceteacher education. This has traditionally been mainly lecture-centred, theory-orien-tated, and experience-led. However, such an approach, now for various reasons, isseen to be not very effective. First, with advances in understanding about howprofessionals best learn, has come the realization that teachers might not be sowilling to be receptive to new ideas they hear during lectures. They are reluctant toaccept information which is inconsistent with their pre-existing knowledge or beliefs,tending only to accept information which is compatible with their existing knowl-edge base. More importantly, teachers often seem unwilling even to modify the newinformation to fit it into their existing cognitive frameworks, which makes it verydifficult for them to assimilate new knowledge. Second, even if teachers are receptiveto the new information, they may not know how to apply it. Teacher professionalknowledge is tacit, personal, and situated. Thus, most teachers find it difficult toapply the various types of educational knowledge and pedagogical skills that theyhave heard about at in-service learning programmes delivered through the lecturemode. This gap between knowing and acting is a key problem that needs to betackled.
In the West, a number of suggestions have been proposed for enhancing theprofessional development of teachers. Joyce and Showers (1982), for example, havepaid particular attention to the effects of peer coaching. Their survey showed that75% of the teachers studied were able to apply what they learned to their classroomteaching if they had participated in in-service learning programmes and peer coach-ing at the same time. Other studies (e.g., Singh & Shifflette, 1996; Sparks, 1986)have also shown that peer coaching is a more effective mode of learning than simplyattending workshops. Furthermore, some scholars from the USA and Hong Konghave been advocating the idea of peer coaching for teachers as a way to avoid theirfear of being assessed by “superiors”.
However, results of research on classroom instruction in Shanghai show that peercoaching, while it can provide teachers with support from their peers, lacks thepowerful theoretical and professional guidance that can be gained from experts. Atthis critical moment in the curriculum reform now in progress in China, if there is nodialogue between experts and teachers, and no collaboration with, and guidancefrom researchers and exemplary teachers, peer coaching will simply result in therepetition of teaching behaviour at its customary level without any improvement.
The use of case studies has been proposed as another effective way to enhance theprofessional development of teachers. This approach was first applied in the Gradu-ate School of Business Administration at Harvard University with remarkablesuccess (Copeland, 1990, cited in Zheng, 2000) and has since been used widely in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 61
the fields of Law and Medical Sciences. Since the 1970s, the case-study approachhas been adopted in teacher education. With this method, both trainers and traineesdiscuss problem situations in an open manner, and attempt to resolve themcollaboratively. More importantly, the process of discussion provides an opportunityfor participants to put theory into practice.
The teaching profession is a unique one that is different from the classical profes-sions, such as medicine, law, and engineering. These classical professions, ingeneral, rely heavily on textual knowledge and a complex level of techniques. Teach-ing, however, tends to be skill-oriented and experience-driven. Teachers, perhapsmore than others, improve their performance through reflecting on their classroombehavioural pattern and taking the appropriate follow-up action. In other words,with the many variables in classroom teaching, a common lesson plan does notalways lead to the same teaching results. Teaching involves the use of teachers’professional knowledge, which involves a great deal more than the application ofcommonly accepted textual knowledge and techniques. The case-study method ofteaching in teacher education is thus unlikely to achieve profound effects.
Research on Teacher Learning Models
It has been accepted widely that organized professional learning activities in whichteachers are able to familiarize themselves with various theories and concepts ofteaching and learning may help to change their beliefs and attitudes towardsteaching, and consequently their teaching practice. This in turn will lead to animprovement in student learning. Such a theory-orientated model (1→2→3) hasbeen applied widely in teacher education, as shown in Figure 1.Figure 1. Research on teacher learning modelsHowever, recent studies (e.g., Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002) have provided analternative view in which new practices of classroom teaching could be utilized as thedriving force in changing teachers’ beliefs and attitudes towards teaching, and theirclassroom behavioural patterns, and thus in improving student learning. Given this,
1. Changes in teacher knowledge and
belief
2. Changes in teachers' classroom behavioural patterns
3. Changes in student learningoutcomes
Figure 1. Research on teacher learning models
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
62 L. Gu and J. Wang
a practice-oriented model (2→3→1) has been advocated recently in teacher educa-tion (Figure 1). School-based research has been suggested as one vehicle that canfacilitate this kind of model effectively.
One example of school-based research in China has been carried out in QingpuExperimental School for more than a decade, and has resulted in ongoing changes inthe attitudes and beliefs of its teachers (Qingpu Instruction Experimental Group,1991). The school, as a result, has become a showcase for current reforms in teachereducation, and the results of the research in the school have been disseminated indifferent districts in Shanghai. The research was divided into different stages:
Stage 1. Focusing on classroom teaching and the search for effective teaching practices. The objective of this phase was to find good practices of classroom teaching. In thisstage, teachers studied the syllabus and teaching materials carefully and intensivelyin order to help their students to master the basic knowledge required by thesyllabus.
Stage 2. Exploring new educational theories. The objective of this phase was to moti-vate students to think. In order to achieve this, a number of meetings were organizedfor teachers to share their views and experiences. At the same time, teachers wereencouraged to review relevant educational theories from which they might gaininsights into how to encourage their students to think more.
Stage 3. Facing the challenge of new ideas. This is the key element of the Qingpumodel. Teachers were asked to look at their own teaching in the light of thepedagogical theories which were reviewed and discussed, in order to encourage themto explore new ways to improve their pedagogical skills.
Numerous other exemplary teachers and educational reformers in China havefollowed a similar pattern of learning from their teaching experience in theirprofessional development. This appears to have been successful because teacherprofessional development is the development of practical knowledge and practicalwisdom. Practical wisdom is tacit, embedded in teaching practice and is consistentwith the individual’s thoughts and behaviour. Furthermore, it is contextual andpersonal, and therefore difficult to teach to others or to acquire formally through theguidance of others; it can be developed and perfected only in concrete educationalpractice.
Action Education Model
Experiences such as the Qingpu model have given strong indications that school-based action learning is an effective way to bring about changes in teachers’ prac-tices. However, while we mentioned above that other professional developmentmodels, peer coaching, and case study have limitations, both of these approaches
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 63
have certain strengths. Peer coaching, although it lacks professional theoretical guid-ance, allows teachers to benefit from the support of their peers. In the case-studyapproach to teacher training, participants may have no opportunity to reflect on thewhole process and engage in follow-up action, but they can benefit from thoroughdiscussion of specific cases with experts. Consequently, in order to capitalize uponthe strengths of all of these models, we have developed the “Action Education”Model, a concept based on “lesson study” (see Stigler & Hiebert, 1999), whichcombines action research and theory learning by means of lesson case studies (Gu &Wang, 2003). Details of the model are shown in Figure 2.Figure 2. The basic model of Action Education“Action Education” is an educational innovation that began two decades agoduring the Qingpu Experiment, and originally focused on “Experience Selection”(see Gu, 1994). Action Education can be considered as a variation of “ExperienceSelection” and action research, and all three are based on the learning cycle “experi-ence–understand–plan–act”. In order to understand more about the concept ofexperience selection, we will use the example of the Qingpu project to illustrate howthis was implemented on a regional basis.
Regional-based “Experience-Selection”
In order to improve the unsatisfactory mathematics performance of students inQingpu District, the Qingpu Experiment in education was launched in the 1970s.After reviewing related literature, the researchers set up a series of experimentsthrough which teachers were able to develop their understanding of their current situ-ation from the level of personal experience to the level of rational understanding, inte-grate their understanding into new experience and put it into practice. Consequently,the quality of teaching improved. Figure 3 shows the experimental cycle of the model.
Existing action:Focusing on individual experience of teaching
New design:Focusing on design of the lesson based on new perceptions of teaching
New action: Focusing on the adjustment of student behaviour
Updating ideas Reflection 1: searching for the gap between myself and others
Improving action Reflection 2: searching for the gap between the plan of the lesson and its implementation
Lesson study as the foundation of the collaboration between teachers and researchers: learning theories, design lessons, and reflections.
Figure 2. The basic model of Action Education
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
64 L. Gu and J. Wang
Figure 3. Research cycle of the Qingpu ExperimentThe Qingpu Experiment (1977–1992) was considered to be a great success becausethe pass rate in the examination for junior high schools (the last stage of free educa-tion) in Qingpu County rose rapidly from 16% in 1979 to more than 85% in 1986.Such an achievement was regarded as very positive and the State Commission ofEducation decided to replicate the experiment through the whole county.
There were two main factors that contributed to the success of the Qingpu Exper-iment. These were the setting up of a practice-based learning community betweenteachers and teacher education institutes, which provided a context in which teachers’experience, research, and related professional learning courses could be integrated; andan invigorating theoretical framework that served as the basis for the action research.
Another key to the success of the Qingpu Experiment has been the quality of theteachers and their pedagogical skills. During the years of the project, there has beena close link between the teachers’ experience in teaching and the professional learn-ing programmes for teachers. Students’ learning outcomes have been used as anindicator of the overall performance of teachers in the district and these haveimproved. In 2002, professionals from the Shanghai Academy of Education Scienceand Qingpu Teacher Education Institute jointly formed an “Action Education”research team to conduct a series of school-based teacher professional developmentprogrammes, with the aim of constructing a new professional development modelfor teachers based on the key factors of the Qingpu Experiment.
The research was divided into two stages: “Research conducted in Qingpu” and“Research conducted in other parts of Shanghai”. We will describe each of thesebriefly in order to give a clear insight into the processes of professional developmentthat occurred.
Research Conducted in Qingpu: From January 2002 to September 2002
Qingpu District in Shanghai was chosen as the research location. Initially a team of30 teachers and researchers was set up to discuss the research design. The research
� ��� �� ��������� � ��������� ���� �� �� �� ��� ������� �� �������� �������� � ��� ����������
������� �� ������ ��������
����������
������
����� � ���� ���
������ �������
����������
���������� ������
Figure 3. Research cycle of the Qingpu Experiment
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 65
was then conducted in four subject areas in six secondary and primary schools. Inthe Implementation phase, lesson observations and in-depth interviews wereconducted in order to understand teachers’ original teaching practice. Followingthis, a series of meetings were held for teachers in different subjects to design newlesson plans. Data were collected from in-depth interviews, lesson observations andpost-lesson discussions were conducted in the New Design Stage (see Figure 2) inorder to discover how new classroom behavioural patterns of teachers had beenshaped by new lesson plans, and again in the New Action Stage (see Figure 2), inorder to find out the most appropriate teaching practice for students. Analyses wereconducted of the changes in teachers’ teaching practice and the teaching effect.Following experience sharing meetings in the Review period, follow up seminarswere held.
Research Conducted in Other Parts of Shanghai (Dissemination of the Idea of “Action Education” in Shanghai) (March, 2003 to present)
During this stage, 80 teachers and 40 research partners from 30 schools in ninedistricts of Shanghai were involved. School-based collaboration models and theconcept of action-based research were introduced to all participants. Data werecollected through various channels, such as questionnaires, discussions, tapes, lessonvideos, lesson observation, portfolios from students and teachers, students’ assign-ments, teachers’ reflection notes and interviews with the teachers, students, andexperts. From the analyses of these we were able to identify a number of criticalfeatures of the programmes.
Critical Features of the Research
The first strength of the professional development was that the teachers’ professionalneeds were used as the basis of the research. A survey of 311 teachers in QingpuDistrict conducted in 2002 revealed two significant results. When teachers wereasked what kind of professional guidance benefited them the most within the contextof curriculum reform (Table 1), 94% of the respondents said they preferred to havelesson observations and related post-lesson discussion with veteran teachers andcurriculum experts. It is obvious that teachers need professional support fromexperts in classroom teaching. When teachers were asked what kind of lesson obser-vation and post-lesson discussion benefited them the most (Table 2), the majority(82.3%) preferred having group lesson preparation, lesson observations, post-lessondiscussions and related follow-up action. This shows that teachers need follow-upactions based on reflection of their lesson teaching.
The second critical feature was that teachers implemented follow-up actions basedupon reflection. Theory can, in principle, effectively guide practice, but many teach-ers refuse to study theory, offering excuses such as insufficient time, and that thetheories are difficult to understand and not useful for their teaching. However,during the action education research, we conducted a survey among the teachers
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
66 L. Gu and J. Wang
which showed that many of them had begun to realize that they did need theoreticalknowledge of the curriculum and methods of instruction. After the researchers hademphasized the importance of theoretical knowledge, the teachers began to acceptthat educational theories were crucial and necessary, and hence they became morepositive towards studying theory.
Improving Action Research Through “Action Education”
Having established the context of the action research through describing the exam-ple of the Shanghai experiments, we are now able to describe the improved model of“Action Education” that has developed from the experiences of these projects.Teacher knowledge consists of general pedagogical knowledge, subject matterknowledge, and pedagogic content knowledge. A superficial understanding ofsubject knowledge is not sufficient, and expert teachers base their teaching on athorough understanding of the subject matter. Moreover, Shulman (1986) pointedout the importance of pedagogical content knowledge for teachers, and how insuffi-cient attention was paid to it. He referred to this as the “missing paradigm”.
Action education offers one effective way for teachers and researchers to collab-orate so that they may improve themselves through learning from each other
Table 1. Teachers’ views: need for experts’ support in classroom teaching
Professional needs of teachers: expert support in classroom teaching %
Reading theories only 3.2Reading theoretical materials and exchanging ideas with colleagues 2.8Having support from veteran teachers and curriculum experts 36.7Having support from veteran teachers and curriculum experts to discuss individual pedagogical skills
35.7
Discussions on specific teaching problems with veteran teachers and curriculum experts
21.6
Table 2. Teachers’ views: needs for support on lesson observations
Teachers need follow-up actions based upon reflection %
Having lesson observations and post-lesson discussions with teachers at the same level
0.7
Having comments and suggestions from curriculum experts and exemplary teachers after conducting a lesson
5.9
Having lesson observations with exemplary teachers and observing how they comment on the lessons
11.1
Having collaboration with experts and exemplary teachers to plan and observe lessons, participating in related post-lesson discussions and making suggestions to improve the lessons
57.7
Having lesson observations with exemplary teachers and linking individual experience as the foundation to participate in related post-lesson discussions
24.6
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 67
(Table 3). This contributes to the resolution of the “missing paradigm” in teach-ers’ professional learning and to the design of more effective and realistic learningprogrammes.
Action Education uses the “scientific discovery theory” and feedback mechanismin the developmental process (see Figure 4). Teachers agree to try a theory-basedidea from the researchers, with the help of a well-established mechanism forcollecting feedback systematically and regularly. In the process of decision makingthere is strong interaction between experience and theory, which inform eachother.Figure 4. Hypothesis-testing model of classroom improvement
A Simplified Model of “Action Education”
It was found that many principals and teachers generally felt that Action Educationwas too complicated and difficult to carry out, and so it was necessary to simplify“Action Education” in order to make it more user-friendly. After a series of experi-ments, we attempted to simplify the model of Action Education into the followingstages: “designing a lesson, having a lesson observation, and post-lesson discussionto generate feedback” as the three basic steps in designing school-based professional
Table 3. The need for teacher and researcher collaboration in professional development
Strengths Weaknesses
Researchers An understanding of the nature of subject matter knowledge;A better understanding of teaching and learning process
Do not know much about normal school life
Teachers Knowing students well; having good techniques for teaching
Confined by individual teaching experience
re-adjusting the plan
evaluation
implementation
adjusting the plan
evaluation
implementation
planning
investigation of present situation
Figure 4. Hypothesis-testing model of classroom improvement
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
68 L. Gu and J. Wang
learning and research activities for teachers. The procedure of the simplified modelof Action Education is as follows.
Step 1. A group of teachers invites one or two researchers to study related materialsand share their views and experience with the aim of enriching teachers’ professionalknowledge of educational theory. They can choose a specific lesson as a case fordiscussion in order to look for ways to improve their pedagogical skills.
Step 2. Colleagues and researchers participate in observation of the revised lesson,reflect on the effectiveness of this lesson, and make amendments to the lesson plan.
Step 3. The revised lesson is implemented and is followed by post-lesson discussionand the teacher’s reflective writing on the process. Such a process is repeated severaltimes in each school term so as to set up a knowledge base for “action education”.
Modes and Techniques of School-based Research and Professional Learning Activities
Video case studies can be useful data-collection tools for Action Education, becausethey can offer an authentic learning environment for teachers, provide a focus fordiscussion, help to broaden their views on education, and stimulate their creativity.This can help teachers to know and understand various kinds of concepts of teach-ing and pedagogical skills, encourage in-depth discussion, and provide opportunitiesfor teachers to observe the way in which theory may be put into practice.
To cater for the different needs and the unique cultural contexts of individualschools across the nation, various types of learning activities were tried out duringthe dissemination of Action Education. These included group study between self-formed teacher groups of ways to conduct school-based learning and research activi-ties; “pioneer groups” of school leaders to conduct initial research in their schools asa model for other teachers to participate; special workshops of research teams set upby “backbone teachers” to form communities of practice for students to learn fromeach other; teaching and research activities conducted by groups of teachers fromdifferent subject, experience, and interest backgrounds to encourage teachers towork towards the goal of the recent curriculum reform; and implementation ofteaching and research activities by individual or teams of teachers, with a cycle ofclose observation, analysi, and comparisons between parallel lessons followed bysuggestions for improvement. In addition, it is a common practice for exemplaryurban schools selected as teaching and research showcases to promote school-basedteaching and research activities in rural and impoverished areas. Often schools coop-erate with each other to achieve the task of promoting teaching and research activi-ties. This helps to maximize resources from each school for the purpose of the futuredevelopment of each school and, in addition, they can learn from each other within aclimate of trust. Problem-orientated teaching and research activities are based on a
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 69
practical problem that all teachers are concerned about, and collaborative researchprovides a context for teachers to resolve their teaching problems. Through cooper-ating with researchers from educational research institutions, teachers are able toexpand their scope of knowledge of teaching and research. Compared to thetraditional type of teaching and research activities, teaching and research activitieswith technical support can become more efficient and varied and can lead to thesetting up of “Online Virtual Teaching and Research Activities”.
In summary, school-based “Action Education” can be presented in differentmodes according to different school cultures. Each mode of activity, however, has itsown advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, the effectiveness of different modesof “Action Education” is highly dependent on different school cultures and thevarious backgrounds of individual teachers.
Analytical Framework for the Various Forms and Skills
As shown in Figure 5, school-based research and professional learning activities canbe analysed in two directions: officially and unofficially organized research andlearning activities (vertically); self-organized and externally organized research andlearning and activities (horizontally).Figure 5. Analytical framework for the school-based organizational forms of research and learning activitiesOfficially organized research activities usually have a fixed schedule, where research-ers and school teachers work together on an assigned topic, whereas unofficially orga-nized research activities may take place on any occasion. These two forms of activitiesare equally important as they both help to build a school culture of conducting researchand learning in which teachers may be motivated to open up their classrooms. Moreimportantly, such a school culture will also encourage teachers to share their viewsopenly, make suggestions and undertake the necessary follow up action for improve-ment. This is a kind of educational reform initiated at the school level.
School leaders seek help and advice from outside professional organizations.However, they are increasingly adopting a more equal partnership model, rather
Officially organized
Unofficially organized
Organized byexternal bodies
Organized by the school itself
Figure 5. Analytical framework for the school-based organizational forms of research and learning activities
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
70 L. Gu and J. Wang
than a top-down approach. Finally, schools will develop their own peer-coachingmodels when the influences from outside experts are gradually lessened.
Model of Skills for Knowledge Sharing
Skills for developing school-based research and professional learning activities are acore issue in the discussion of professional development for teachers. Luft (1984)pointed out that skills of self-disclosure and active listening are the key elements ofgroup learning activities. The results of this study clearly indicate that problem-solving skills are equally important skills for teachers to learn to share.
In our view, there are two other skills important in promoting group learning. Oneis the skill of problematizing classroom behaviour. Exemplary teachers have theability to question usual phenomena and maximize their ability to face challenges.This kind of problematizing ability shows how exemplary teachers are able torespond to challenge in their daily working lives in a way that enhances their profes-sional development (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Tsui, 2003). The other is theskill of constructive reflection; that is, exploring the constructive connection betweenclassroom behaviour and reflection on it. The experiences in Action Education inChina have shown that the processes described in the Action Learning Modeldevelop this skill in all the persons concerned.
Concluding Remarks
Classroom teaching is a key indicator of the professional competency of teachers.Our study has paid particular attention to classroom teaching, which was the focusof our field of study. The results of this study can be summarized as follows.
1. Lesson study has been shown to enhance effective cooperation between teachersand researchers. Our research shows that teachers’ learning and views abouttheir jobs are based on their experience with the lesson case studies. The interac-tions between teachers and researchers can be pictured as kite-shaped, as shownin Figure 6. With classroom teaching as the medium and lesson case studies asthe carrier, teachers and researchers can work together in analysing lessons,determining the problems, and finding new ways to resolve them.
2. Action Education helps teachers develop as researchers. With an increase ofinformation from research, the knowledge gap between teachers and researcherhas become wider than ever. Action Education encourages cooperation betweenteachers and researchers, and requires teachers to play a dual role as audienceand actors. In this way, Action Education helps to bridge the gap betweentheory and practice, and enables teachers to become practitioners in theresearch community.
3. The implementation of school-based research and professional learningactivities need to be institutionalized. School leaders should institutionalizeschool-based research and professional learning activities based on consensus
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 71
among teachers and the developmental plans of their schools. They should alsoset up guidelines to enable teachers to take the necessary steps to improve theirteaching.
4. Our study is a starting point of “Action Education” and more studies areneeded. This research has introduced the features of Action Education, itsimplementation, and effects. However, more studies are needed in this particu-lar area, and issues to be investigated further are: bridging the gap betweentheory and practice; resolving problems occurring in the process; applying it toteaching practice; the advantages and disadvantages of lesson study in teacherdevelopment; how school-based research and professional learning activities arerelated to other topic-orientated learning programmes; and ways to institution-alize school-based research and professional learning activities.
Figure 6. Interactions of teachers and researchers on classroom problemsOverall, this study supports the tenet that enhancing collaborative learning amongteachers and utilizing their analytical abilities on their teaching practices are keys totheir professional learning. Teachers adopting the “Action Education” model workin collaboration, discuss their own teaching and find ways to improve it further withtheir colleagues and/or the researcher. Teachers are also provided with opportunitiesto observe alternative instructional practices by other teachers in the same learningcommunity. This is quite different from the situation found in many other parts ofthe world, where many teachers regard teaching as an individualized activity and theclassroom a private place where they “work behind a closed door” (Connelly &Clandinin, 1995). According to Little (2001), when teachers are sufficiently exposedand inspired by a “big picture” of teaching practices and student experiences,professional teacher learning will take place. Collaboration and collegiality amongteachers will enhance teacher professional learning when teachers learn from eachother through sharing and developing their expertise in a collaborative manner(Hargreaves, 1994). In order for teacher professional development to be rooted inlearning, open sharing and stronger collaboration are essential. As argued by Hawley
Figure 6. Interactions of teachers and researchers on classroom problems
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
72 L. Gu and J. Wang
and Valli (1999), teacher professional learning is best promoted in a learning-enriched school with collaborative culture.
The “Action Education” model, a modified version of action research, has beenproposed as a way of promoting the idea of school-based research and professionallearning activities for teachers and has been widely implemented in many parts ofChina for a number of years. This new model is based on the concept of lesson study,drawing on elements of models of peer coaching and case study, and combines guid-ance to teachers about their pedagogical skills and related follow-up action. It is aninnovative model which aims at promoting teacher professional development on thebasis of action learning. It focuses on collaborative learning, learning from experienceand exploring the constructive connection between action and reflection. It is anattempt to bridge the gap between theory and practice, to develop teachers’ practicalwisdom and to promote teacher professional development in daily practice. It can besimplified or transformed in different ways according to the different conditions ineach school. In a nutshell, the crux of teacher professional learning is to make teachinga research- and reflection-based profession in which teachers are given the opportu-nities to reflect on and learn from their practices, to review their efforts and share theirexperience and understanding of student learning and teaching with others and towork in partnership with researchers and/or other colleagues in a learning communityto develop an analytical awareness of their professional practices.
Note
1. This paper is a modification of the plenary report of the national conference “Construction ofSchool-based Research and Learning System” held in Shanghai in December, 2003. Thispaper only extracts and highlights the key points. The national conference initiated manylarge-scale nationwide school-based research projects in China.
References
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implica-tions of expertise. Chicago. Open Court.
Clarke, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth.Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 947–967.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1995). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscape: Secret,sacred, and cover stories. In F. M. Connelly & D. J. Clandinin (Eds.), Teachers’ professionalknowledge landscapes (pp. 3–15). New York: Teachers College Press.
Gu, L. (1994). Jiaoxue Shiyan Lun [On teaching experiment]. Beijing China: Educational SciencePress.
Gu, L., & Wang, J. (2003). Jiaoshi Zai Jiaoyu Xingdong Zhong Chengzhang [Teachers’ growth inthe context of “Action Education”]. Curriculum, Teaching Materials and Pedagogy, 2003, 1–2,2–10.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers, changing times: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmod-ern age. London: Cassell.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional development. In L.Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 127–150). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
School-based Research and Professional Learning 73
Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40(1), 4–10.Little, J. W. (2001). Professional development in pursuit of school reform. In A. Lieberman & L.
Miller (Eds.), Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters (pp. 23–44).New York: Teachers College Press.
Luft, J. (1984). Group processes: an introduction to group dynamics. Palo Alto, California: Mayfield.Qingpu Instruction Experimental Group. (1991). Xuehui Jiaoxue [Learning to teaching]. Beijing,
China: People’s Education Press.Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Singh, K., & Shifflette, L. M. (1996). Teachers’ perspectives on professional development. Journal
of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 10(2), 145–160.Sparks, G. M. (1986). The effectiveness of alternative training activities in changing teaching
practices. American Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 217–225Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The Teaching Gap. New York: The Free Press.Tsui, A. B. M. (2003). Zhuiqiu Zhuoyue [Understanding expertise in teaching]. Beijing, China:
People’s Education Press.Zheng, J. (Ed). (2000). Anli Jiaoxue Zhinan [AGuide to Methods of Case Teaching]. Shanghai,
China: East Normal University Press.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f L
iver
pool
] at
15:
57 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
