Why Is Professional Development Characterised By Conceptual Vagueness?
Discussing this, Coffield (2000: 3) says that professional development is characterised by “conceptual vagueness”. As a result, teachers’ PD can be viewed at “macro-level concerns or micro-level realities” (Guskey, 1991: 240). That is, teachers may view PD as needing to relate to their individual professional needs, while management in schools may view it in terms of supporting policy implementations, and at a national level it may be viewed as regulations for teachers reflecting greater accountability by setting standards of effectiveness (Guskey, 2000; Neil and Morgan, 2003; King, 2011). Friedman and Philips (2004) also suggest that professional development is an unclear and contested concept.To illustrate this, they list a range of descriptions
…show more content…
Friedman and Philips (2004: 369) indicate that professional development activities are perceived in terms of formal training courses linked to gaining a qualification or career development, which they describe as PD being “portable and bankable” (op cit.). Similarly, (Barak et al., 2010) says it comprises courses with a beginning and end. This is a representation of PD as formal activities based around content universally applicable to all teachers, making it “synonymous with centrally organised training courses” (Crawford, 2009: 56), which answers the macro-level concern for accountability and standardisation (Hardy, 2010). However, this focus on knowledge accumulation does not necessarily result in changed practice (Easton, 2008a; Elmore, 2004; Garet et al., 2001), with studies showing that some teachers do not change practices as a result of such PD (Bubb et al., 2008; Opfer and Pedder, 2011). For example, in their longitudinal study of teachers’ professional development focused on instruction around employing specific instructional practices (Porter, Garet, Desimone, Yoon and Birman, 2002: 83), using self-reports of changes in practice from 287 teachers, found “little change in overall teaching practice” after three years. The authors found that “teachers changed little in terms of the content they teach, the pedagogy they use to teach it, and their emphasis on performance goals for students” (op. cit.). Porter and his colleagues felt that their findings “add support to the concept that both teaching and professional development are typically individual experiences” for teachers (op. cit.).
In contrast to “centrally organised training” (op. cit.), the idea of more individually experienced PD for teachers is also explored in the literature by authors (Keiny, 1994; Grossman, 1994; Miller and Silvernail, 1994; Leithwood, 1992),
Friedman and Philips (2004: 369) indicate that professional development activities are perceived in terms of formal training courses linked to gaining a qualification or career development, which they describe as PD being “portable and bankable” (op cit.). Similarly, (Barak et al., 2010) says it comprises courses with a beginning and end. This is a representation of PD as formal activities based around content universally applicable to all teachers, making it “synonymous with centrally organised training courses” (Crawford, 2009: 56), which answers the macro-level concern for accountability and standardisation (Hardy, 2010). However, this focus on knowledge accumulation does not necessarily result in changed practice (Easton, 2008a; Elmore, 2004; Garet et al., 2001), with studies showing that some teachers do not change practices as a result of such PD (Bubb et al., 2008; Opfer and Pedder, 2011). For example, in their longitudinal study of teachers’ professional development focused on instruction around employing specific instructional practices (Porter, Garet, Desimone, Yoon and Birman, 2002: 83), using self-reports of changes in practice from 287 teachers, found “little change in overall teaching practice” after three years. The authors found that “teachers changed little in terms of the content they teach, the pedagogy they use to teach it, and their emphasis on performance goals for students” (op. cit.). Porter and his colleagues felt that their findings “add support to the concept that both teaching and professional development are typically individual experiences” for teachers (op. cit.).
In contrast to “centrally organised training” (op. cit.), the idea of more individually experienced PD for teachers is also explored in the literature by authors (Keiny, 1994; Grossman, 1994; Miller and Silvernail, 1994; Leithwood, 1992),