The psychological dimension of transformation in teacher learning

Abstract

Against a background which recognises pedagogical content knowledge as the distinctive element of teacher competence/expertise, this theoretical essay argues for its central construct -that of transformation -to be understood by teachers and teacher-educators in psychological terms (as was originally proposed by Dewey). Transformation requires teachers to fashion disciplinary knowledge such that it is accessible to the learner. It is argued that for transformation to happen, teacher thinking must include a sophisticated grasp of cognition and metacognition if teachers are to be characterised as competent, let alone expert. This article is written within a context of considerable social and academic scrutiny in the United Kingdom of the form and content of professional teacher preparation and development. In recent years the contribution of psychological knowledge to teacher-education has been filtered through procedural lenses of how best to 'manage classrooms', 'assess learning', 'build confidence' or whatever without a matched concern for psychological constructs through which such issues might be interpreted; thus leaving teachers vulnerable in their professional understandings of learning and its complexities. That society now requires high-level cognitive engagement amongst its participants places cognitive and metacognitive demands on teachers which can only be met if they themselves are conceptually equipped.

How efficiently are we using our understanding of the tacit dimension of teaching?

“…Maclellan (2012) draws on Shulman (1986) with the generation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) as the key distinguisher of knowledge exclusive to teachers within the profession. While tracing Shulman's influence to Maclellan (2012) emphasises that research on cognitive processes of teachers is entangled with the cognitive processing of the learners. The argument inferred in this critique emanates from the need to fully understand each of these in more depth before establishing any connections.…”

“…Transformation of curricula knowledge into quality provision for learners is distinctive to the work of teachers. Maclellan (2012) draws on Shulman (1986) with the generation of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) as the key distinguisher of knowledge exclusive to teachers within the profession. While tracing Shulman's influence to Maclellan (2012) emphasises that research on cognitive processes of teachers is entangled with the cognitive processing of the learners.…”

“…The argument inferred in this critique emanates from the need to fully understand each of these in more depth before establishing any connections. Maclellan (2012) also bemoans the loss to teacher quality created by ‘misplaced’ emphasis on pedagogical knowledge in research with minimal corresponding focus on the cognitive composition of teaching. Coleman (2014:1) states emphatically that ‘by ignoring or overlooking the teacher's thoughts we omit a rich body of information about professional practice…’.…”

“…Fenstermacher (1994) is another example of research on reasoning and its historical position on research into teaching. Maclellan (2012:414) also pinpoints and utilises the terminology ‘pedagogical reasoning’. Contemporary research (Loughran, 2019) affirms the place of pedagogical reasoning in this exploration of cognitive processes, with Ovenden‐Hope and la Velle (2015) signposting links between strength in pedagogical content knowledge and pedagogical reasoning.…”

The invisible plan: how English teachers develop their expertise and the special place of adapting the skills of lesson planning

“…Research by Moran (2008) demonstrates that most observation of teachers is reductive and conducted solely for the purpose of accountability (West et al, 2011) rather than enhancing teacher quality (Slater et al, 2012;Ingvarson and Rowe, 2008). Significant recent summaries of research, for instance Coe et al (2014), contain a key message similar to that by Maclellan (2012) entreating more research on teaching should be derived from studies of cognition and metacognition with a view to deepening our understanding of the complexity of teaching. Our paper adheres to this call in our summary of the research evidence on lesson design from the teacher cognition study (see Enow, 2016).…”