Pedagogy, Culture & Society

ISSN: 1468-1366 (Print) 1747-5104 (Online) Journal homepage: [Link]/journals/rpcs20

Professional Development and Reflective Practice:

purposes, processes and partnerships

Christopher Day

To cite this article: Christopher Day (1999) Professional Development and Reflective Practice:
purposes, processes and partnerships, Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 7:2, 221-233, DOI:
10.1080/14681366.1999.11090864

To link to this article: [Link]

Published online: 17 Feb 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 19357

View related articles

Citing articles: 14 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

[Link]
 Pedagogy, Culture & Society, Vol. 7, No.2, 1999

Professional Development and

Reflective Practice: purposes,
processes and partnerships

CHRISTOPHER DAY
University of Nottingham, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT At the heart of adult learning !les reflection, a much used but
rarely defined term In the worlds of educationists. The purpose of this
article Is to examine Its limitations and possIbilities for learnIng and change.
In doing so, It discusses the choices with which teachers are confronted
concerning its purposes and processes and argues that If It Is to be
successful it is essential from time to time for them to engage In
partnerships with colleagues from Inside or outside the school as a means of
confrontation of thinking and practice which Is Itself a necessary process If
the outcome of reflection Is the posslblllty of change.

Introduction
COntinuing professional development Is essential If teachers are to
remain up to date In their knowledge of the curriculum, wise in their
selection and use of a repertoire of pedagogical skills, committed and
enthusiastic about their work and the students they teach, self confident,
and clear about their purposes. Yet for most teachers, formal
development opportunities remain sporadic, occurring principally
through In-service education and training. The extent to which other
forms of development are available e.g. critical friendships, mentoring,
networking, action research will depend as much on the culture of the
school and the effects of broader policy contexts as on their own
inclination or Initiative. The principle location for learning remains, as It
has since schools were founded, the classroom itself. Here, however, the
development of routines and tacit knowledge, reliance upon intuition or
pedagogical tact and the 'crowds, praise and power' (Jackson, 1968)
severely limit the desires and abilities of many teachers to move beyond
the limited privacy of 'single loop' learning (Argyris & Schon, 1974). A key

221
CHRISTOPHER DAY

issue, then, in improving schools is how to promote adult learning in

adverse circumstances, on the assumption that if teachers are to be
successful in their teaching, they need to be learners themselves.
It is generally agreed that reflection in, on and about practice is
essential to building, maintaining and further developing the capacities of
teachers to think and act professionally over the span of their careers.
Whilst much has been written about the different purposes, processes
and outcomes of reflection there remains a lack of clarity about its
practices, in particular how these may lead to change. Most of the writing
is by academics, and those publications by teachers, whether alone or in
collaboration with academics, are often the result of attendance on
courses for the purpose of accreditation. In short, whilst the evidence of
the benefits and costs of engaging in reflective practice is voluminous, it
seems to represent the work of a small minority of teachers. Whether
most teachers engage In systematic reflection which contributes to their
development and capacity to Improve the quality of learning
opportunities for students remains an open question. Deliberative
processes of reflection at least seem stili to be 'the exception rather than
the rule' (Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986, p. 28). The reasons for this are well
rehearsed: i) conditions of service for most teachers mean that little time
is available; II) most teachers' learning is incidental, occurring in the
classroom; Ill) teachers' learning lives are characterised by fragmentation
and discontinuity; iv) direct classroom experience seems to be the
principle means for learning; and v) few schools or Individual teachers
routinely plan for Intervention by others Into their natural learning lives
for the purpose of peer assisted learning. Yet there are opportunities
even within the intensity and busyness of teachers' working lives. This
article argues that there are choices to be made and attempts to clarify
those which all teachers have In relation to determining the purposes
and orientations of reflective processes in which they engage. It
discusses different kinds of partnerships necessary to enhance the
capacities to reflect upon thinking and practice to be enhanced and the
qualities and skills necessary to participate successfully In these.

The Nature and Purp08e8 of Reflection

Essentially, reflection involves the participant in a critique of practice, the
values which are Implicit in that practice, the personal, social,
Institutional and broad policy contexts in which practice takes place, and
the implications of these for Improvement of that practice. It is, then,
about the past, the present and the future; it Is about 'problem posing' as
well as 'problem solving' (Mezirow, 1991, p. 105); and it is essential to
building and malntalning the capacity of all professionals whose work
focuses upon the care and development of children, young people and
adults - whether in advantaged or disadvantaged - to maintain their
effectiveness in changing circumstances.

222
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

Because the reflective process is a dialectic between thought and

action, theory and practice (pedretti, 1990, p. 325) it has been conceived
as praxis through which change occurs:
In praxis, the Ideas that guide action are just as subject to change as
the action Itself. Therefore, only through a fundamental shift In our
beliefs, values and feelings about teaching and learning, will we be
effective In bringing about significant change in our practice. Creating
a culture of critical reflection enhances our educative potential, and
provides practitioners with opportunities to deconstruct conventional
'" practices. (Carr & Kemmls, 1986, p. 33)
What is particularly interesting in this perspective is that these authors
introduce the notions of i) a link between reflective practice and
'emancipation' from the limitations of 'conventional' practices. This
implies the ability to exercise autonomy in developing a repertoire of
practice; and Ii) the necessity for 'fundamental shifts in beliefs, values
and feelings' if change is to occur. Whilst this focus is an essential part of
reflective practice, it does not recognise that change itself may be
evolutionary or additive rather than radical or transformational,
depending upon circumstance and disposition. Its authors, like other
writers on reflection (e.g. Schon, 1983), do not pay enough attention to
the importance of the emotional self (Goleman, 1995), preferring instead
the high ground of rationality and cognition. So to engage in reflection
creates opportunities for choices which relate to values as well as
purposes, contexts and change. Whatever the orientation, however, its
use presents possibilities for self-evaluatlon. It is:
a model of a teacher who, given particular circumstances, Is able to
distance himself from the world In which he Is an everyday participant
and open himself to Influence by others. (Day, 1991, p. 49)
This model of the teacher as systematic inquirer is essential to the
concept of 'reflective practitioner' and affects the nature of the research
relationships between school teachers, university academics and those
who shape policy.
Various writers have coined the terms reflection-in-action,
reflectlon-on-actlon, reflectlon-about-actlon and reflectlon-for-actlon which
Involves forward planning (Schl>n, 1983; Zeichner, 1993). Recently there
have been critiques about the notion of reflection-in-action which, It Is
claimed, is impossible In practice because there Is Insufficient 'tlme at a
conscious level (Eraut, 1995). Reflectlon-on-actlon occurs when reviewing
the action from outside its setting; reflectlon-about-actlon occurs when
reviewing the broader personal, social, economic and political contexts in
which the action occurs. It Is often accompanied by a desire to achieve
social Justice, emancipation or Improvement. It has been suggested,
however that, even when the circumstances for reflection are favourable ,
most teachers reflect principally at the 'PI' level of practice and do not,
therefore, concern themselves with reasons or ethical Justifications for
their teaching (Handal & Lauvas, 1987). This is partly to do with the

223
CHRISTOPHER DAY

'busyness' cultures in which they work and partly the traditional

'practicality ethic' of the teaching profession. It has also been suggested
by some that governments are now using 'reflective practice' as a means
of promoting technical proficiency, thus developing a new 'technlcist'
teaching culture which further exacerbates the perceived theory-practice
gap between the academy and schools, academics and school teachers;
and, more importantly, diminishes the capacity of teachers to act
effectively in using the discretionary judgement which is seen as central
to their professionalism (Hargreaves & Goodson, 1996).

Kinds of Reflection
Using van Manen's (1977) conceptual framework, Grimmett et al (1990) in
Canada, proposed three modes of reflection:
• technical (as an Instrument to direct or control practice. This may be
used to Improve the efficiency of the 'delivery' of existing prescribed
curricula but not to question its value);
• deliberative (as a means of choosing from a range of alternative views
'and practices of teaching);
• dialectical (as a means of transforming by reconstructing practice
within concepts of social justice and emancipation).
More recently, others have located learning through reflection within the
context of fundamental values and beliefs about education. Five
"orientations" of reflective practice have been proposed: the immediate,
the technical, the deliberative, the dialectic and the transpersonal:
• Immediate orientation: emphasis on pleasant survival ... tendency to
focus upon Immediate demands or task in hand, pedagogy often
eclectic, but shallow.
• Technical orientation: emphasis on development and perfection of
teaching methodology and efficient delivery of prescribed results.
Typically emphasises behavioural techniques.
• Deliberative orientation: emphasis on discovery, assignment and
assessment of personal meaning within an educational setting. Accept
given ends but negotiate process and content.
• Dialectic orientation: emphasis upon political emancipation,
questioning educational ends, content and means. Tendency to focus
upon political and social Issues. Pedagogy Involves continual
. questioning, revision and Internal validation, stressing empowerment
and personal responslblIity.
• Transpersonal orientation: emphasis upon Inner self development and
relationship of Internal to external (Welllngton & Austin, 1996).
It may be, however, not only a matter of choice, for not all teachers are at
a stage of readiness to engage In all of these reflective orientations.
Indeed, the culture of the school In which they work may discourage
them from doing so. However it Is Important that teachers engage in each
of the~e forms of reflection during their career lives at times which are

224
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

appropriate to the maintenance and development of commitment,

knowledge, expertise, and personal and professional health. This
suggests a continuum rather than a hierarchy of reflective practice. The
dilemma is which to choose and when. Reflecting about the action is a
form of reflection which demands particular attention in current national
contexts since it focuses upon tensions between policy and practice and
the struggle for supremacy between different interest groups' definitions
of 'professionalism'. (See Hargreaves & Goodson, 1996 for a valuable
discussion of different forms of professionalism.) Behaving as
professionals clearly involves reflection not only in and on, but also about
the action - it involves critical inquiry into the moral, ethical, political
and instrumental issues embedded in teachers' everyday thinking and
practice. Reflection of this kind is a means for professionals both to
exercise responsibility and accountability for the decisions that they
make in their teaching and to maintain the broader perspectives of the
inter-relationships between contexts, purposes, practices and outcomes
which inform their views of what It means to be and grow as a
professional. My view Is that no single form of reflection Is necessarily
'better' than another, but that teachers must be Involved in all during the
COurse of a career. The different kinds of reflection may, therefore, be
Conceived as being parts of a continuum of reflective practice, rather than
different levels In a hierarchy. However, if teachers want to avoid
bureaucratic and technical conceptions of their role that have historically
been given to them, and if they are going to become technically
competent and reflective, then it is reasonable to suggest that they must
seek to maintain a broad vision about their work and not just look
inwardly at the efficiency of their own practices within externally
Imposed agendas, however well-Intentioned they may be:
Teachers cannot restrict their attention to the classroom alone,
leaving the larger setting and purposes of schooling to be determined
by others. They must take active responsibility for the goals to which
they are committed, and for the social setting In which these goals may
prosper. H they are not to be mere agents of others, of the state, of the
military, of the media. of the experts and bureaucrats, they need to
determine their own agency through a critical and continua] evaluation
of the purposes, the consequences, and the social context of their
calling. (Zeichner & Liston, 1996, p. 11)

Reflective Processes
Schools have long been characterised as lonely places for adults to work
(Cole, 1997, p. 18). Conditions of service and the organisational cultures
In many schools do not allow for regular professional dialogues about
teaching which go much beyond anecdotal exchange and the trading of
techniques (Day, 1997a). This effectively discourages teachers from
challenging their practice. So, In a sense, they have been disfranchised,

225
CHRISTOPHER DAY

unable to find opportunities for taking an active part in the production of

knowledge about their own teaching.
Teachers are cut off, both from the possibility of reflecting and
building on their own know-how and from the confusions that could
serve them as springboards to new ways of seeing things. (Schon,
1992, p. 119, In Day, 1997a, pp. 42-43)
Argyris & Schon (1974), who investigated the work of people in several
professions, including teaching, characterised the 'normal' way of
learning as 'single loop' in which 'we learn to maintain the field of
constancy by designing actions that satisfy existing governing variables'.
Promotion of this kind of learning is prevalent in school cultures which
discourage systematic self and peer review of thinking, planning and
practice. More importantly, it remains embedded in the reality, if not
rhetoric, of many training courses for teachers which teach self-reliance
and self-sufficiency, and in school cultures where the sharing of problems
and issues may be seen as signs of weakness. Argyrls & Schon (1974)
stress the need from time to time to move to 'double loop learning' in
which Intentions and practices in teaching are raised to an explicit,
publicly accessible level (Day, 1997a, p. 43). They also suggest that
Improving teaching, especially collectively, is more likely when
practitioners articulate the insights, values and strategies they bring to
situations. Theoretical ideas about teaching and learning, whether
generated from outside the classroom (propositional knowledge) or
inside the classroom (personal, practical, practical knowledge) are also
likely to stimulate, build and sustain reflection and professional
conversations by providing a framework for dialogue.
The problems In pursuing reflective practice on ones own have been
well documented in research on the busyness of classrooms, the
pressures caused by Increased bureaucracy associated with new forms of
accountability, and the difficulties of self-confrontation which challenges
beliefs and practices which have become valued routines and may lead to
possibilities of potentially uncomfortable, temporarily disruptive change
processes (Day, 1993). These, and cultures In schools which often
discourage disclosure, feedback and collaboration act as potential
barriers to the kinds of participation In all forms of reflective practice
previously Identified. The problem with reflecting alone is that there Is a
limit to what can be disclosed and what information can be collected and
received by an individual with a 'vested' interest in avoiding
uncomfortable change processes. Others are needed In the process.
Although this aspect has not always been made explicit, the concept of
reflective practice has been linked with that of collaboration.
Peer partnerships and networks - discussions and dialogues
between practitioners with common purposes - are needed to move from
routine to reflective practice in schools; and many researchers have
identified the dangers of parochial cultures which cut off schools from
opportunities to open up and renew thinking and practice, hence from

226
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

any progress (Hargreaves, 1994; Day, 1995, 1997b). One way of combating
insularity is to use higher education for intellectual, affective and
practical support. I have argued elsewhere that external intervention
which offers such support is a necessary condition for continuing
professional development (Day, 1991, p. 38).

Partnership Choices
I will now turn to the situated meanings of collaboration and
co-operation:
Collaboration Is the process of shared creation: two or more
Individuals with complementary skills Interacting to create a shared
understanding that none had previously possessed or could have
come to on their own. (Scharge, 1990, In Fullan, 1993, p. 40)
Collaboration between school and university implies not only that
individuals possess certain dispositions, knowledge and skills, but also
that certain conditions and relationships exist which are qualitatively and
purposively different from those in co-operation in which one partner is
Invited by another to work on his/her agenda. Sachs (1997) provides a
useful distinction between collaboration and co-operation. The former
Involves joint decision-making, requires time, careful negotiation, trust
and effective communication. Both parties are learners In an enterprise
which focuses upon enhancing professional dialogue. The latter may
contain these elements, but role boundaries are defined from the outset
and power relationships are unquestioned and maintained; and there Is
no Intention to engage In mutual learning:
When power and prestige are unequal, "collaboration" can easily result
In "co-optation" or even In domination masked by a euphonious label.
(Erickson & Christman, 1996)
In a partnership model the work does not belong to anyone Individual or
one interest group, but is jointly owned by each of the participants. The
Voices of both are listened to and heeded. It is a partnership in which
teachers and significant others are actively Involved In negotiating
processes and outcomes; and the power relationships of traditional
models are avoided. Of course, within such a model, roles will vary. The
ethical and practical principle is equity rather than equaJlty.
The role of the academy Is to promote and sustaIn an environment
which provides challenge and support through research which is
embedded In development. Teacher educators are, In a sense, invited,
trusted interventionists who aim to seek questions which are perceived
by the teachers as relevant to their needs, to add their own perspectives,
to Investigate answers to these questions collaboratlvely and to place the
onus for action on the teachers themselves. In this respect, it is
Important that It is the teacher's voice that is heard to speak throughout
the action and report of the action. 'Voice Is a term used increasingly by

227
CHRlSTOPHER DAY

researchers concerned with teacher empowerment; the term expresses

an implicit critique of the prevailing tendency in earlier studies of
teaching to reduce the complexity of teachers' work, and to privilege
theoretical formulations over the concerns of teachers themselves'
(Elbaz, 1990, p. 15). It is important, to ensure that the teacher's
perspective is recognised not only in the initiation of research,
development and evaluation and through contracted, negotiated
partnerships, but also in any accounts and reports that may result. The
participation of teachers and academics in shared discourses and actions
of these kinds constitutes a small step toward the creation of a new sense
of community (Elbaz, 1990). However, the creation of community takes
time and is not always easy; and in the process, new knowledge and skills
will need to be developed and tentative steps to change relating to
individual and collective need supported. There will always, also, be
individuals and groups whose individual or collective vested
self-interests may not be served by this; and accounts of practice should
include the voices of others who are involved i.e. parents and pupils.
Negotiation and contracting are key components of collaborative
partnerships. Contracting is not intended to be a legalistic process.
'Agreements' aTe often made informally (Day, 1991). Elsewhere these
have been referred to as social covenants rather than contracts. Such
social covenants will be:
• negotiated, not proclaimed. by the partners involved;
• clear to all involved parties;
• be based upon mutual respect and trust;
• able to be reviewed as the work progresses and revised if necessary
(Day, 1991, p. 41).
These kinds of sustained interactive partnerships are difficult to foster
and sustain, since to some academics they may represent new
restrictions upon choice of and conduct of research. They may well have
a case, and there should always be room for the production of
propositional knowledge as represented by academic research
communities, as well as practice knowledge generated by
teacher/researchers through reflection on practice. Nor is this kind of
work without cost. It can be labour intensive and requires of the
participants technical and human relationship skills far beyond those
necessary in more traditional research. Furthermore. the establishment
of any working relationships must take account of existing cultures both
within schools, within universities and between schools and universities.
For example, worlds which emphasise the systematic gathering of
knowledge, formal examination of experience, professional criticism and
seemingly endless discussion of possibilities rather than solutions, are
likely to contrast sharply with worlds dominated by action, concrete
knowledge and busyness (Day, 1991, p. 537; Cuban, 1992, p. 8). The
disenabling effect of the two task cultures upon the establishment of long
term relationships should not be underestimated. In the partnership
models of research and development which have been suggested here the

228
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

work is jointly owned, power relationships of co-optation rather than

collaboration are minimised (Erickson & Christman, 1996, p. 150), and
traditional difficulties of ownership and knowledge transfer and
utilisation avoided.
The success of such partnerships relies on the presence of certain
attitudes:
• a willingness to share
• a recognition that sharing involves:
(a) disclosure
(b) opening oneself to the possibility of 'feedback'
• a recognition that changing is sometimes:
(a) threatening (to self-esteem and current practice)
(b) difficult (it requires time, energy, new skills)
(c) satisfying
• a recognition that the degree to which people are willing and able to
share on emotional as well as cognitive levels may, therefore, be
restricted (Day, 1991, p. 40) because of their own personal,
professional and cultural histories, the 'regimes of truth' which bind or
blind them.
Collaboration of this kind is not easy. It demands the establishment and
maintenance of long term relationships which are at the very least
co-equal, in which teacher educators, student teachers and teachers are,
'active agents In the production of a new pedagogic discourse, rather
than merely the consumers of the professional knowledge produced by
academics and educational researchers' (Edwards & Brunton, 1993,
p. 156). Problems of this form of practitioner research being 'colonlsed'
by higher education academics have been Identified (EIliott, 1991).
However, It does potentially offer teachers the opportunity to engage In
professional development through systematic Investigation of practice
with the help of a 'mentor' or critical friend Inside or outside the school
which otherwise might not be available. Critical friends are those who
are able to perceive needs of the 'clients' - the teacher and the school-
to support them to challenge the regular routine and Insular context of
classroom, to offer Intellectual, affective and moral challenge and
support. Collaboration between teachers and academics will always be
uneasy. Thus the recognition of the need to develop a new language for
communication and the establishment of self-crltlcal and self-reflecting
communities, whilst attractive, depend for their fulfilment upon the
abilities of participants to create contracts, either collectively or
Individually, which are based on forms of critical friendship.
In involving ourselves In the micro politics of knowledge use (Zeull,
1996, p. 178) we need appropriate competencies and qualities:
The competencies we then need as professionals must Include the
competence to cross borders, cultures and dialects, the learning and
translating of multiple languages (the political, the everyday, the
academic) and the courage to transgress when faced with social

229
CHRISTOPHER DAY

Injustices ... How we practice our authority Is then the Issue, not what
we claim or profess: If we believe in something, then we have to
practise It. (Walker, 1996, In Day, 1997b, p. 204)

Conclusion
In considering the nature of reflective practice partnerships for
professional development, then, there are three fundamental Issues
which need to be addressed In order to manage the Issues raised In this
article. First among these is the nature of the relationship between the
academy and the school, the academician and the schoolteacher.
Although their worlds and roles are In many respects different (Day,
1991; Cuban, 1992; Zeichner, 1995) they are both concerned with
generating knowledge about their own and others' practice for the
purpose of Improvement. Both must, therefore, engage In reflective
practice. Since this Is the case, it follows that both are 'researchers' and
'practitioners'. In the kinds of formal, systematic reflection discussed In
this article which often require the critical friendship of a trusted and
skilled other, and are thus characterised by the intervention of one or
more persons into the lives of one or more others, it is Important that the
relationships are healthy, and that their roles and responsibilities are
understood. Collaborative partnerships between teachers and university
tutors, schools and departments of education, should, therefore, be
based upon principles of equity: joint Identification (of the kinds of
reflection chosen); joint ownership (of the processes of reflection); and
mutual respect (for the individuals' responsibility to decide upon their
responses to the processes and outcomes of reflection). Secondly, we
need to be clear about the limitations of reflective practice and the ways
In which partnerships can enhance this, as they have been described In
this article. Relatively few teachers In schools or universities are likely to
have many opportunities to engage In sustained, systematic reflection on
and about practice In partnership with others. Most wlll reflect
unsystematically or Informally, usually alone, or at best at the level of
discussing practice which others have not observed. Others will rely
upon experience and Intuition - with all the limitations to change which
these c~ontain - to guide them through their careers. There are those,
also, who suggest that since teachers' work in many countries Is
Increasingly being directed by closely monitored government policy
initiatives, only 'technical' reflection - a relatively simple form of
practlce-evaluatlon - Is necessary. It is not the Intention of this article to
denigrate any of these kinds of reflective practice. However, it does
suggest that for sustained individual and systemic Improvement It Is not
simply desirable but essential for teachers In all Institutions to engage
from time to time In the kinds of reflective practice partnerships which
make relationships between reflective practice, change and Improvement
explicit. Thirdly, the discussions In this article have been based upon a
particular notion of professionalism In which teachers have a

230
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

responsibility for the education of students which goes beyond the

instrumental, encompassing responsibilities to educate for citizenship
and to imbue in their students a positive disposition towards lifelong
learning. Such teachers must be 'knowiedgeable, experienced, thoughtful,
committed and energetic workers' (Devaney & Sykes, 1988, p. 20).
Teaching, whether in schools or higher education, is a highly complex
activity and it is, therefore, in the interests of policy makers and
managers to ensure that teachers remain healthy, knowledgeable and
committed to providing the best possible learning opportunities for
students. Since the needs of society and students will change, it is
necessary for teachers to be able to evaluate the part which they play in
meeting such needs. It follows that they need regular opportunities to
exercise discretionary judgement; reflect upon their moral and social
purposes; work collaboratively with colleagues in and outside school;
engage In a self-dlrected search; and struggle for continuous learning
related to their own needs for growth of expertise and maintenance of
standards of practice. In short, they need to be educated to become and
remain practitioners at the heart of whose practice is reflection.

Acknowledgement
I am Indebted to members of the TNTEE SNWF for their comments on
parts of earlier versions of this article.

Correspondence
Professor Christopher Day, School of Education, University of
Nottingham, University Park, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham
NG8 IBB, United Kingdom ([Link]@[Link]).

References
Argyrls, C. & SchOn, D. A. (1974) Theory in Practice: increasing professional
effectiveness. New York: Jossey Bass.
Carr, W. & Kemmls, S. (1986) Becoming Critical: education, knowledge and action
research. London: Falmer Press.
Cole, A. L. (1997) Impediments to Reflective Practice: toward a new agenda for
research on teaching, Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 3, pp. 7-27.
Cuban, L. (1992) Managing Dilemmas while Building Professional Communities,
Educational Researcher, 21, pp. 4-11.
Day, C. (1991) Only Connect ... Relationships between Higher Education and
Schools, In H. K. Letlche, J. C. Van der Wolf & F. X. Plootj (Eds) The
Practitioner's Power of Choice in Staff Development and In-service Training.
Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Day, C. (1993) Reflection: a necessary but not sufficient condition for professional
development, British Educational Research Journal, 19, pp. 83-93.

231
 CHRISTOPHER DAY
Day, C. (1995) Qualitative Research, Professional Development and the Role of
Teacher Educators: fitness for pupose, British Educational Research Journal,
21, pp. 357-369.
Day, C. (1997a) In-service Teacher Education In Europe: conditions and themes for
development In the 21st century, Journal of In-Service Education, 23, pp. 39-54.
Day, C. (1997b) Being a Professional in Schools and Universities: limits, purposes
and possibilities for development, British Educational Research Journal, 23,
pp. 193-208.
Day, C. (1991) Roles and Relationships In Qualitative Research, Teaching and
Teacher Education, 7, pp. 547-547.
Devaney, K. & Sykes, G. (1988) Making the Case for Professionalism, In
A. Lieberman (Ed.) Building a Professional Culture in Schools. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Dreyfus, H. L. & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986) Mind our Machine: the power of human
intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: The Free Press.
Edwards, A. & Brunton, D. (1993) Supporting Reflection In Teachers' Learning, In
C. Calderhead & P. Gates (Eds) Conceptualizing Reflection in Teacher
Development. London. Falmer Press.
Elbaz, F. (1990) Knowledge and Discourse: the evolution of research on teaching
thinking, In C. Day, M. Pope & P. Denlcolo (Eds) Insights into Teachers'
Thinking and Action. London: Falmer Press.
Elliott, J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change. Buckingham: Open
University Press.
Eraut, M. (1995) Developing Professional Knowledge within a ClIent-Centred
Orientation, In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds) Professional Development in
Education: new paradigms and practices. New York: Teachers College Press.
Erickson, F. & Christman, J. B. (1996) Taldng Stock/Making Change: stories of
collaboration In local school reform, Theory into Practice, 35, pp. 149-157.
Fullan, M. (1993) Change Forces: probing the depths of educational reform. London:
Falmer Press.
Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Grimmett, P., MacKInnon, A, Erickson, G. & Rlecken, T. (1990) Reflective Practice
In Teacher Education, In R. T. Clift, W. R. Houston & M. Pugach (Eds)
Encouraging Reflective Practice: an analysis of issues and programmes. New
York: Teachers College Press.
Handal, G. & Lauvas, P. (1987) Promoting Reflective Teaching: supervision in action.
Milton Keynes: Society for Research Into Higher Education/Open University
Press.
Hargreaves, A (1994) Changing Teachers, Changing Times. London: Cassell.
Hargreaves, A. & Goodson, I. F. (1996) Teachers' Professional Lives: aspirations
and actualities, In I. F. Goodson &A Hargreaves (Eds) Teachers' Professional
Lives. London: Falmer Press.
. Jackson, P. W. (1968) Life in Classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Mezlrow, J. (1991) Transformative Dimensions ofAdult Learning. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Pedretti. E. (1960) Facilitating Action Research In Science, Technology and Society
(STS) Education: an experience In reflective practice, Educational Action
. Research, 4, pp. 307-327.

232
 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE

Sachs, J. (1997) Reclaiming the Agenda of Teacher Professionalism: an Australian

experience, Journal of Education for Teaching, 23, pp. 263-275.
Schon, D. A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
van Manen, M. (1977) linking Ways of Knowing with Ways of being Practical,
Curriculum Inquiry, 6, pp. 205-228.
Walker, M. (1996) Subaltern Professionals: acting in pursuit of social Justice,
Educational Action Research, 4, pp. 407-428.
Wellington, B. & AustIn, P. (1996) Orientations to Reflective Practice, Educational
Research, 38, pp. 307-316.
Zeichner, K. M. (1993) Action Research: personal renewal and social
reconstruction, Educational Action Research, 1, pp. 199-220.
Zeichner, K. M. (1995) Beyond the Divide of Teacher Research and Academic
Research, Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 1, pp. 153-172.
Zeichner, K. M. & Liston, D. P. (1996) Reflective Teaching: an introduction. New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
ZeulI, J. S. (1996) Using Research as a Substltute tor Practical Judgement: response
to John Eisenberg's The Limits of Eductional Research, Curriculum Inquiry, 26,
pp. 175-179.

233