Assignment three
Clark, D., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002).
Elaborating a model of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher
Education
Introduction
The optimization of the outcomes of a process is facilitated by the understanding of
that process.
If we are to facilitate the professional development of teachers, we must understand
the process by which teachers grow professionally and the conditions that support
and promote that growth.
In this paper, professional growth is represented as an inevitable and continuing
process of learning.
By acknowledging professional growth as a form of learning, we become inheritors of
a substantial
Body of learning theory and research.
In this paper, we provide the details of an empirically grounded model of professional
growth that incorporates key features of contemporary learning theory.
1. Teacher change:
Clarke and Hollingsworth (1994) identified a number of alternative perspectives. In
that paper we suggested that the notion of ‘‘teacher change’’ was open to multiple
interpretations, and that each interpretation could be associated with a particular
perspective on teacher professional development.
We described six perspectives on teacher change:
Change as training—change is something that is done to teachers; that is, teachers
are ‘‘changed’’.
Change as adaptation—teachers ‘‘change’’ in response to something; they adapt
their practices to changed conditions.
Change as personal development—teachers seek to change in an attempt to improve
their performance or develop additional skills or strategies.
Change as local reform—teachers ’change something’ for reasons of personal
growth.
Change as systemic restructuring—teachers enact the ‘‘change policies’’ of the
system.
Change as growth or learning—teachers’ change inevitably through professional
activity; teachers are themselves learners who work in a learning community.
It should be noted that these alternative perspectives on change are not mutually
exclusive, and that many are in fact interrelated.
We would suggest that the central focus of current professional development efforts
most closely aligns with the ‘‘change as growth or learning’’ perspective.
At that time it was based on a training paradigm that implied a deficit in teacher
skills and knowledge (Guskey, 1986). Most professional development consisted of
’one workshops aimed at teacher mastery of prescribed skills and knowledge.
Professional development attempts based on this deficit model have been criticized
throughout the literature. Researchers including Guskey (1986), Howey and Joyce
(1978), McLaughlin and Marsh (1978), and Wood and Thompson (1980) have
highlighted the ineffectiveness of professional development programs that have an
overemphasis on this deficit approach.
Others, including Fullan and Stiegelbauer (1991), Johnson (1989), and Lovitt and
Clarke (1988), have provided convincing evidence of the failure of ‘‘one-shot’’
professional development approaches.
The clear ineffectiveness of attempts to effect teacher change through professional
development programs based on the deficit-training-mastery model has provided the
impetus for much research related to the process of change and professional
development in recent years.
A significant outcome of this research has been the shift in focus from earlier
conceptions of change as something that is done to teachers (that is, change as an
event with teachers as relatively passive participants), to change as a complex
process that involves learning.
The key shift is one of agency: from programs that change teachers to teachers as
active learners shaping their professional growth through reflective participation in
professional development programs and in practice.
Johnson (1996) presented a case for reconceptualizing teacher professional
development as ‘‘opportunities for learning.
Clarke & Hollingsworth, (2000), as a means to situate the professional development
of teachers in realistic contexts(contextualizing)-
Darling Hammond-this contextualizing -authentic assessment of teaching.
2. Modeling professional growth
Fullan (1982) recognized that many professional development programs fail to
consider the process of teacher change.
Such programs often attempted to change teachers’ beliefs and attitudes,
with the expectation that changes in beliefs and attitudes will lead to changes
in classroom practices and behaviors.
This perspective took improved outcomes for students as the ultimate goal of
teacher professional development.
This model represents how teacher change happens as a result of professional development (in-service training).
It shows a linear sequence, meaning each step is expected to lead naturally to the next.
1. Teacher In-service (Professional Development Input)
Teachers attend workshops, trainings, seminars, or short courses.
The purpose is to expose them to new ideas, innovations, methods, or content.
This stage assumes that professional development is the primary driver of teacher growth.
Key assumption:
If teachers receive high-quality training, they will automatically update their knowledge and beliefs.
2. Change in Knowledge & Beliefs
According to this model, in-service training first changes teachers internally.
Teachers are expected to develop new knowledge about teaching strategies, subject content, or pedagogy.
They are also expected to revise or reshape their beliefs, attitudes, and assumptions about teaching and learning.
Key assumption:
Teachers must change their beliefs before they change their behavior.
This means professional development is believed to work from the inside out: → change thinking → change practice.
3. Change in Teachers’ Classroom Practice
Once teachers’ beliefs and knowledge change, this model expects them to implement new instructional practices.
Teachers should begin using the strategies they learned in training.
Their classroom behaviors and instructional decisions change accordingly.
For example, adopting inquiry-based teaching, using new technology, modifying assessment practices, etc.
Key assumption:
Improved practice naturally follows once teachers “believe” in the innovation or understand it deeply.
4. Change in Student Learning Outcomes
This is the final desired impact.
If teachers change their practice, students are expected to learn more effectively.
Students’ performance, engagement, understanding, and achievement should increase.
Key assumption:
Better teaching practice leads to better student outcomes.
Change in classroom practice change in student
outcomes(engagement,understanding,improvement,performance,less misconceptions)---
change in teachers belief
Note:if teachers have a good classroom practice,there is mprovment of students outcome
following teachers believe.
The Interconnected Model (as shown in Fig. 3) suggests that change occurs through
the mediating processes of ‘‘reflection’’ and ‘‘enactment’’, in four distinct domains
which encompass the teacher’s world: the personal domain (teacher knowledge,
beliefs and attitudes), the domain of practice (professional experimentation), the
domain of consequence (salient outcomes), and the external domain (sources of
information, stimulus or support).
Features Guskey model Interconnected model
Structure Linear,sequencial Dynamic,non-linear,web-like
Sequence Practice---outcomes---beliefs No set sequence,change can start at any
where
Role of belief Final outcome of successful change Integrated component(can be cause or
effect)
Mechanism Implied through implementation Explicite reflection &enactment
success
Core idea Change beliefs by providing a Growth is continuous,reflective dialogue
practice work between a teachers inner world and their
professional practices
3. The empirical foundations of the model
By illustrating each component of the model with empirical data we hope to both
explain the model and demonstrate its viability.
3.1. The studies
(i) The ARTISM study: This study was conducted and reported by Clarke, Carlin, and
Peter (1992) and consisted of a longitudinal investigation over 18 months of the
professional growth of 18 mathematics teachers. The teachers were participating in
an extended professional development program (Active and Reflective Teaching In
Secondary Mathematics).
(ii) The EMIC study:EMIC--exploring mathematics in classroom-The professional
growth of six teacher participants in one EMIC course was examined over a period of
18 months.
(iii) The negotiation of meaning project: This 4-year project was directed by Clarke
and involved the collection of classroom video data of 55 high school mathematics
and science lessons at grade levels 7–10.
Note: Since it is our purpose to explicate the Interconnected Model rather than
to report the findings of these three studies specifically, data are used
selectively to illustrate particular facets of the model.
3.2. The practice of teaching-
The case study in Clarke et al. (1992) follows Robert, an experienced mathematics teacher
nearing retirement, over 18 months as he participated in the ARTISM professional development
program.
Initially resistant to change and confident in his conventional teaching methods,
he continued with traditional practices until, about a month into the program,
he tried investigative group work modeled during the in-service sessions.
This shift led to noticeably higher student engagement and motivation.
Soon after, he introduced another innovative lesson using a bicycle to explore
ratio through structured group investigations, rotating leadership roles, and
student self-assessment; despite early challenges, students quickly became active,
independent learners.
From then on, Robert continued experimenting with group work, real-world
investigations, and new assessment approaches, ultimately regretting not adopting
such methods earlier.
The case demonstrates change across all four domains of the Interconnected
Model of Professional Growth:
(i) External source of information or stimulus (the external domain): professional
publications and conversations with colleagues are both important external sources of
new information and stimulus.
(ii) Professional experimentation (the domain of practice):
The use of collaborative group work, of extended mathematical investigations
prompted by a task specifically linked to a real world context, and the use of student
self-assessment were all forms of professional experimentation for this teacher. Each
represented a change in practice.
(iii) Teacher knowledge, beliefs and attitudes (the personal domain):
Change in teacher beliefs and attitudes were evident in the increasing value that the
teacher attached to the new teaching strategies that represented in themselves new
pedagogical knowledge for that teacher.
(iv) Salient outcomes (the domain of consequence):
3.3. Mediating processes What were the mechanisms whereby change in one of the
above dimensions triggered change in another?
(i) Enaction:
(ii) Reflection: active, persistent and careful consideration
3.4. The change environment In the case under discussion, the professional growth of the
teacher was made possible by particular elements in the change environment.
Opportunities to participate in such professional development programs,
school subscription to professional journals,
administrative encouragement of teachers to experiment with innovative
teaching strategies,
The encouragement of collegial discussion and the structural provision of
opportunities to share and reflect on each other’s practice are all facets of the
change environment that act to afford or constrain teacher growth and,
specifically, the change that might occur in any one of the change domains in
the Interconnected Model.
3.5. Links to learning theory
* Interconnected model of professional growth is linked to either
Cognitive perspective(focused on development different forms of teacher
knowledge) or
Situative perspective (which views learning as evolving participation in social
practices ) on learning.
The authors argue that the Interconnected Model of Professional Growth accommodates
both perspectives.
The mediating processes of enaction (implementation of practice) and reflection
(thinking about practice) link the cognitive and situative dimensions, showing how
teachers’ individual practices and personal theories develop within shared professional
communities.
3.6. Interconnections
This section explains that teacher growth depends not only on what teachers do but on
how they interpret the consequences of their actions, since reflection and enaction are
shaped by teachers’ personal meanings.
Using an example of a teacher misinterpreting a student’s behavior, the authors show that
classroom practice is co-constructed through reciprocal interpretations of teachers and
students, and that these interpretations directly influence changes in teacher beliefs and
practices.
In the Interconnected Model, teachers’ inferences—guided by their existing beliefs,
goals, and typifications—mediate whether new practices are seen as effective, making
interpreted change more important than observable behavior.
The model serves as
an analytical tool the model has been used with considerable success as a tool for
the categorization of teacher change data,
a predictive tool-the model poses the possibility of particular change sequences and
growth networks, not necessarily evident in the data, whose possibility can be either
empirically investigated or practically promoted in experimental studies.
an interrogatory tool -the model facilitates the framing of specific theoretical and
practical questions such as
What are the possible pathways leading to change in teacher knowledge,
beliefs or attitudes?’’
or ‘‘What is the role played by the teacher’s existing theoretical framework in
the process by which the consequences of classroom experimentation are
construed?’’
or, more specifically, ‘‘What are the outcomes of new practice which a
particular teacher considers to be salient to their workplace or school
context?’’
or ‘‘What factors in the school context constrain teachers’ ability or inclination
to reflect on the efficacy of their practice?’
4. Identifying specific patterns in teacher professional growth
4.1. Change sequences and growth networks
The process by which change occurs (as evidenced by empirical data) can be
represented using the Interconnected Model by denoting particular ’change
sequences’.
A change sequence consists of two or more domains together with the reflective or
enactive links connecting these domains, where empirical data supports both the
Occurrence of change in each domain and their causal connection. Change in one
domain may not lead to
change in another.
4.2. Accommodating previous models
The Interconnected Model incorporates all previous linear models.
4.3. Empirically derived structural patterns
This section emphasizes that teacher professional growth can occur even without formal
in-service training, as teachers naturally experiment, reflect, and refine their practice in
everyday classroom situations—a process effectively captured by the Interconnected
Model.
Hollingsworth’s research further shows that growth often follows cyclical rather than
linear patterns, with teachers repeatedly moving between practice and personal reflection
before considering outcomes or changing beliefs.
Evidence from multiple studies confirms the existence of diverse growth networks, some
resembling Guskey’s linear model and others more iterative.
While no fixed “learning styles” for teacher growth were identified, the variability in
pathways suggests that professional development should offer multiple avenues for
experimentation and reflection to support different ways teachers naturally grow.
5. The role of the change environment
The context in which teachers work (the Change Environment) can have a
substantial impact on their professional growth.
5.1. An environment conducive to change
5.2. A different school environment
6. Implications and future applications
The Interconnected Model highlights the growing complexity of teaching and calls for
professional development models that match this complexity.
By identifying key change domains, mediating processes, and multiple relationships
among them, the model helps designers of professional development programs anticipate
and support varied pathways of teacher growth.
Its non-linear, interconnected structure reveals unique “change sequences” and “growth
networks,” allowing recognition of the individual and idiosyncratic nature of teacher
learning.
Analogous to Steffe’s focus on “the mathematics of children,” the model places “the
pedagogy of teachers”—their evolving theories and practices—at the center of
professional development efforts.
Teacher growth is framed as a situated, personal learning process shaped by practice,
meaning, and context, requiring support systems that respect individual differences in
how teachers learn.
Ultimately, it promotes professional development programs that offer teachers multiple
opportunities and pathways to learn in the ways that best suit them.