Stage Fright.

Last week, we had a look at teacher knowledge and how this could impact the decisions that teachers are making regarding promoting dialogue; this built on the discussion we had previously that looked at teacher beliefs and the role that they play in classroom practice.

This week, we are looking at how teachers improve over time. This is particularly important in the context of oracy because talk is not something that teachers necessarily believe is important, nor do they necessarily have the knowledge required to promote talk. However, the following ideas regarding improvement can be applied to any improvement for any teacher in any context.

What is stage theory?

What a teacher knows and how they apply this knowledge is different at different stages of a career. Novice teachers, for example, often have a well-developed theoretical understanding of teaching but lack the experience of the practical implementation of this knowledge; such experience can only really be developed over time, though it is worth pointing out that this is accelerated in networks in which support and collaboration are high. It is not a given that a teacher will get better the more they teach.

Stage theory, as it links to teaching, is a helpful, though limited, model for progression. It suggests that schema can be built in a deliberate, explicit way and, from a theoretical perspective, this is certainly the case. Take, for example, the points we considered last week regarding pedagogical content knowledge: it is possible for a teacher to build an understanding of the best way to approach the structured teaching of grammar and this knowledge can be built intentionally so that teachers can understand the best way to sequence learning.

As a consequence, developing sufficient theoretical knowledge within teachers so that they understand how to build student knowledge regarding oracy is one thing that needs to be factored into training and improvement.

Why does this matter?

The limitations to stage theory come when we consider the need to balance theoretical knowledge with practical application. Students are complicated individuals; they are even more complicated when in groups. So whilst stage theory indicates that developing teacher knowledge is essential, actually, providing mechanisms to deploy this knowledge in a way that builds practical understanding is essential.

It is this point that is so often missed when considering teacher education and improvement. In a world of mandatory professional development hours, as we currently have in NSW, for example, economies of scale mean that these hours are met through large-scale, lecture-style learning sessions. whilst these lectures are efficient at both building knowledge in teachers, and at ticking off lots of hours very easily, they miss that crucial link between theory and practice.

The consensus view is that theoretical knowledge is best applied through networks of small groups of teachers engaged in deliberate practice. There is a bit of noise around this: the size of the groups, for example, and the way that they are structured are worth considering in more detail, which we will do over the coming weeks.