Articulating a Model of Teacher Educators’ Knowledge

• In Event: Issues in the Facilitation of Video-Based Professional Development

Abstract

Our study examines the planning and implementation of a video-based professional development program for middle school mathematics teachers in a southern Appalachian rural county.

By establishing generative constructs for representing teacher knowledge (Ball, 2008; Shulman, 1986), the field of educational research laid fertile ground for discussions about teacher learning and practice. While there are numerous studies examining best practices in teacher education, the field has yet to clearly articulate what a knowledge base looks like for teacher educators (Borko, 2011; Kazemi, et al., 2009). Refining a representation of teacher educator knowledge can help us more effectively and accurately communicate results, questions and concerns within the field.

Three bodies of theory informed our study. Shulman’s construct of teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (1986) was a basis for articulating the particular knowledge teacher educators use in developing learning opportunities for teachers. Research shows that experts – including expert teachers (Sabers, 1991) – notice, organize, retrieve and learn information differently than novices (Bransford, 2000). Our research team had diverse areas of expertise, which influenced how we viewed our teachers’ videos, designed and enacted our video clubs, and reflected on their implementation. Sherin, Jacobs, and Philipp (2011) examined how teachers notice and make sense of different elements of teaching. In this study, we examined how our diverse areas of expertise, manifested in our teacher educator PCK, influenced what we noticed during the design and implementation of video clubs.

Our relatively rural and isolated location forged a diverse research team, including math educators, instructional technology experts and qualitative methodologists. This diversity of backgrounds forced often unspoken assumptions and jargon-based “short cuts” to be explicitly articulated. This promoted reflective discussion that unearthed clear articulations of the underlying knowledge of each participant, which in turn provided a rich research context.

We used design research in creating, implementing and studying our PD setting (Brown, 1992). First, the group researched and designed an integrated, video-based PD model. We then worked with six teachers for a year, meeting monthly. Our iterative monthly cycle included planning with a teacher, videotaping her classroom, reviewing the video, designing a PD session focused on the video, and reflecting on the session. We collected audio and video recordings of all planning and PD sessions. We transcribed and analyzed the sessions using discourse analysis, uncovering themes in our planning discussions, design choices, session facilitation and post-session reflections.

Our findings emerged in two categories. First, our analysis allowed us to define different components that comprise teacher educator knowledge. For example, teacher educators must understand a larger context beyond the local setting and know how to identify and link local problems to larger research findings. Second, we identified catalysts that precipitated changes in teacher educators’ knowledge and detailed the processes of promoting that change. For example, we observed a trajectory of shared ownership. We moved from initially explaining our knowledge to others, to referencing one another’s areas of expertise, to understanding and assimilating co-facilitator knowledge. Our design research context offered a well-positioned perspective on teacher educators’ specialized knowledge.

Authors

• Malayna Bernstein, West Virginia University

• Sarah Selmer, West Virginia University

• Johnna Bolyard, West Virginia University