The first two sentences of the article nails it, and was perhaps true until Graham Nuthalls work came along. It says:
"Richly developed portrayals of expertise in teaching are rare. While many characterisations of effective teachers exist, most of these dwell on the teachers management of the classroom"
In researching my forthcoming book, The Expert Teacher, this pretty much describes alot of what is out there.
Shulman develops what is believes is more important:
"We find few descriptions or analyses of teachers that give careful attention not only to the management of the students in the classrooms, but also to the management of ideas with classroom discourse". (my emphasis are italicised and Shulmans is in bold.
This is still true today. We rarely speak of management the learning of ideas in teacher texts, yet it is entirely right that both are necessary for a successful lesson/class/teacher. For me,this makes Nuthalls studies so enlightening,as he pursued the ideas during the process of learning to give real insight. In identifying the management of ideas Shulman creates a purposeful way of introducing the very important concept of Pedagogical Content knowledge: the knowledge teachers have that allows them to manage ideas in the classroom.
The second paragraph of the article then provides the most wonderful portrait of expertise, written by the mysterious Gudmundsdottir. (Sadly, the full text is to be found in an unpublished Doctoral dissertation called Knowledge use among experienced teachers: Four case studies of high school teaching) This piece of writing is one that I keep re-reading, as it is both succinct and rich. What follows are my thoughts and interpretation of this portrait of an expert teacher.
The first four words of the portrait tell us exactly how teachers develop. It takes time. 25 years of time. Time that the profession is rapidly loosing. Nancy, the subject of the portrait is a teacher who is part of "continuing study" of experience teachers. Continuing study instantly suggests that mere snapshots are not enough in capturing the nuanced complexities of what teachers do. Again, my mind is reminded of the complexities that Nuthalls work revealed. For instance.
Nancy depth of knowledge of her subject and pedagogy is highlighted which begins Shulmans definition of Pedagogical Content Knowledge. It is this unique combination of knowledge that makes a teachers professional knowledge unique, purposeful and special.
The initial descriptive of her classroom does exactly what Shulman says usual classroom descriptions do: it describes the management of the classroom. Nancy "tempers boisterousness" and behaves like a "symphony conductor" Nancy teaches, prompts thinking and students interaction with her and the ideas being taught. It is clear that Nancy knows her students and everything that is occuring in her classroom, and it is the "substantial interaction" that would allow allow her make the assessments to make decisions about pacing, ordering and necessary structuring described.
However, this is not what makes this portrait special. As yet there has been no mention of the management of ideas. But what follows reveals the innerworkings of an expert teachers mind.
Nancy knows what she expects of the students with this particular piece of content, and how their knowledge will develop. Additionally she has already worked out the questions and teaching prompts needed for a range of teaching situations. She refers to:what the students may need to do; her questions; what is most important.There is purpose and priority in her thinking and it is clear that she is combing knowledge of the content and of pedagogy.
Shulman describes this as a"conceptual framework", that she uses guide "her own sequencing of material and formulation of questions" and how to "divide [the content] appropriately for assignments and activities". Over the years teachers develop their PCK, and this was the first glimpse we were given.
So far the following ideas of what expert teachers know have been highlighted:
1. What the key ideas are for each topic
2. How to use these key incidences are for differing pedagogical purposes.
3. What content is most difficult.
4. How to organise the content for differnt students.
5. Where to place emphasis and
6. How to place knowledge into themes.
A framework for trawling through our PCK in more detail can be found here.
What follows in the portrait deepens what we understand about expert teachers. The day Nancy arrives to work ill, barely able to speak. Nancy's teaching style, previously described as pretty much evrything passing "through Nancy" transforms into much more student led teaching style,that remains organised that allowed a students to engage with the content with care. Expert teachers have this flexibility as they have PCK, their knowledge goes beyond merely knowing the subject well, they know, and can apply their rich knowledge of pedagogy to different situations, students and content. Importantly they know that successful teaching looks has more than one "style". What is especially glorious about this article is the celebratory feeling it gives about teacher knowledge. Nancy's ability is described as "dazzling" and "virtuosity" of the learners in her care. For me the focus on classroom management belies the ability and professional knowledge that the teaching profession has.
Shulman closes this section with two key questions, that bring me back to this article.
1. What is it important for me to believe, understand and know to allow me teach as well as I possibly can? What are the gaps? What is next for me to develop?
2. What can we do to help other teachers teach with Nancy's skill?
The second is question is as important as the first. Teacher collaboration and sharing of practice are key to our development. PCK gives us the framework through which we can become expert.
The article then goes on to discuss and structure PCK in a more formal way, and is worth the read. But for me the work of Nancy is inspiring and she is the teacher I wish to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment