Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers: Supporting Early Career Teachers in Australian and International Primary and Secondary Schools, and Educational Social Learning Spaces 9813363533, 9789813363533

Citation preview

Bernadette Mary Mercieca Jacquelin McDonald

Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers Supporting Early Career Teachers in Australian and International Primary and Secondary Schools, and Educational Social Learning Spaces

Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers

Bernadette Mary Mercieca · Jacquelin McDonald

Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers Supporting Early Career Teachers in Australian and International Primary and Secondary Schools, and Educational Social Learning Spaces

Bernadette Mary Mercieca Australian Catholic University Ivanhoe, VIC, Australia

Jacquelin McDonald University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, QLD, Australia

ISBN 978-981-33-6353-3 ISBN 978-981-33-6354-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0 © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Foreword

It is a pleasure and a reward to write the Foreword to Mercieca & McDonald’s fresh and powerful book on Sustaining Early Career Teacher Communities of Practice. Much has been written about Communities of Practice (CoPs) and Collaborative Professionalism over the years, but rarely do we see such a comprehensive treatment. The fact that the book focuses on “early career teachers” gives it focus but enables the authors to range far and wide while providing valuable insights to both the concept of CoPs, and the professional lives of early career teachers. Chapter 1 contains a comprehensive and novel way of establishing the framework for the book, but also characterising the nature of CoPs. The framework—which the authors call the Value Creation Framework (VCF)—is simple while providing a roadmap for going deeply in the topics in subsequent chapters. The framework has four sides: “Strategic Value” and “Enabling Value,” “Network Activities,” and “Transformational Values.” The rest of the book pursues various kinds of social networks in terms of how they generate minimal to maximal individual learning on the one hand, to deep organisational change that they call Emancipatory Collaborative Team Learning. The authors say that the VCF can be “used to envision what activities or learning [that] members would like to see happen at each phase, and what conditions will enable these aspirations to be achieved.” Life cycles of CoPs are then framed and used to examine various specific learning cycles and their impact through phases of development, action and impact such as: initiation, creation, infancy, maturing/sustaining and recreating. The authors then review the research on CoPs fleshing out the findings on evolving social learning theory. In sum, Chapter One sets the stage for envisioning and evaluating CoPs. Chapter 2 dives into the case of “early career teachers,” especially those working in rural areas. Normally a neglected topic (which in effect means that such teachers typically operate in isolation with little support and a sense of being left on their own). Then the authors change this image by studying over a three year period two groups of early career teachers in rural Victoria, Australia. The authors show how supportive CoPs help teachers locate themselves with in a “vast landscape of practice” countering what they describe as “the tyranny of distance.” We find in these cases of support by mentors and interaction with other teachers in a community of learning, that these early career teachers alter stereotypes of rural living, gain a stronger sense of v

vi

Foreword

self, greater knowledge and agency. We also find that these teachers, partly because of leadership needs, and rapid early growth are more likely to take on leadership positions late in their second year, or third year of teaching thereby accelerating their growth, and career progression. We find in these two cases of deliberate support for early career teachers in rural communities that CoPs provide the opportunity for young teachers to thrive in a supportive environment. Chapter 3 is devoted to leadership: How school principals support and sustain CoPs as proactive leaders; how to actively foster and support leaders at other levels of the school (sometimes called distributed leadership, or middle-level leadership); and how leaders can forge unity of purpose with communities. It is here that we see the vital role of school leaders, and teachers (especially as they operate in collaboration) to gain a deep “contextual knowledge” of the community–something that I found to be the hallmark of “nuanced leaders” (Fullan, 2019). As the authors note “honouring people’s histories and contexts” is critical to establishing knowledge and trust, which is essential for success. Chapter 4 is a novelty and a surprise. It takes us into Twitter where we meet certain leaders who have deliberately set up learning groups using Twitter as the communal centre. Several examples are portrayed along with names of the leaders, and the focus and activities they are engaged in. We meet several of the Twitter leaders—handles, and pictures, as well is portrayals of what how they set up and run the communities of learners. We learn how worldwide as well as regional groups get started and maintain a commitment to learning. The crucial roles of facilitators and mentors are taken up in relation to starting up, maintaining and assessing impact. Individual learners are helped, as well as groups, and even how to set up debates. In chap. 5 Mercieca & McDonald’s Belgian colleagues discuss collegial networks of early career teachers, where they provide comprehensive treatment of infrastructure, and membership. Included here are examples of worldwide networks which operate as focused but geographically large scale learning enterprises. Chapter 6 is based on a case study in Northern Ireland. Here the authors’ colleague examines the CoPs in action involving pre- and in-service teachers, and action research where we see how networks can be organised for “individual learning” or can delve deeply into “collaborative learning.” Case examples of reflective learning are featured as well as examples from both pre-service and in-service. A valuable typology is presented which focuses on three typed of CoPs: Emancipatory individual learning, emancipatory mutual learning and emancipatory collaborative learning. Participatory action research underpins all three of these modes of learning. The authors use this framework to critique existing models of professional learning. The final chapter includes a retrospective examination where the authors identify five key findings from the book as a whole (I’ll leave this to the reader to discover). Beyond the findings, Mercieca & McDonald’s main recommendation is that it can make a big difference if a system of support—informal but focused—is set up, especially for early career teachers. It affects who stays and develops in the profession for decades to come, not to mention how these teachers affect others.

Foreword

vii

In short, Sustaining CoPs of Early Career Teachers contains a goldmine of ideas. It takes a complex problem and zero’s on a small piece of it (Early Career) with practical ideas that could make a world of difference. Michael Fullan Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto - St. George Campus, Toronto, Canada

Preface

Our Focus Much has been written in recent decades about the need to support Early Career Teachers (ECTs)—those in their first five years of teaching. Partly this has been due to their alarming attrition rates globally (AITSL, 2016; Gallant & Riley, 2017; Flemish Department of Education & Training, 2013; Ford, Olsen, Khojasteh, Ware & Urick, 2019) but also to the precarious scenarios many graduate teachers find themselves in both in terms of gaining and maintaining regular employment and dealing for the first time with the increasingly high demands of the classroom. Bamberry (2011) highlights the current casualisation of the workforce where ECTs can feel, “as disposable as the next tissue that comes out of the box” (p. 58) when schools come to determining their annual staffing. From a psychological perspective, Ford et al. (2019) drawing on their large study of 1500 teachers from 73 schools in a large, high-poverty, urban US Midwestern school district, refer to the feelings of marginalisation and exclusion that many of the teachers feel and their risk of burnout, when they lack sufficient support from their principal and staff. In addition, Nicholas and Wells (2016) point to the limited professional development that casual teachers are able to access and the consequent problems that arise from this in terms of accreditation and other steps in their career progression. Others such as Veenman (1984) and Dicke, Elling, Schmeek and Leutner (2015) speak more generally of the praxis or reality shock that beginning teachers experience even if they have an ongoing position when the reality of dealing with day to day lesson preparation, class management and the multitude of other expectations that they have to deal with sets in. These issues and the support that can potentially alleviate them will be addressed in Chap. 2 based on research with rural ECTs in Australia and in Chap. 5 involving ECTs in Belgium, while Chap. 6 explores the importance of coaching and mentoring partnerships within such collaborative settings in Northern Ireland. Further, Chap. 3 considers the views of the leadership of the school in Chap. 2 in terms of how they have sustained the Communities of Practice that their ECTs were involved in at a rural Australian secondary school. From a different perspective, Chap. 4 considers

ix

x

Preface

support for ECTs in social media networks such as Twitter. This is a form of professional learning that all teachers can access no matter what their status—having, as one Twitter Chat Leader states, “professional learning is in the palm of your hand!” As our title suggests, the importance of supporting and sustaining ECTs through collaborative gatherings of teachers through Communities of Practice or social networks and a supportive school environment is the central theme of this book. In the first chapter, the authors articulate the theoretical foundations of Communities of Practice and the most recent developments in theory. Examples from higher education are used to illustrate the practical application of Communities of Practice. The following chapters take this core theory and view it from a variety of different perspectives as outlined above. What are Communities of Practice? They are essentially groups of people who come together to share their practice and learn with and from each other. This is an age-old phenomenon, although the term itself is fairly recent (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2015). Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner describe Communities of Practice as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion about something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly (p. 1).” An understanding of Communities of Practice continues to evolve, and includes the three defining characteristics of the domain, the community, and the practice. A common interest, shared concern or desire to begin a joint enterprise draws people together. As they continue to meet, their knowledge deepens and they become more skilled as they participate in learning loops, where shared practice is taken back to the workplace, implemented and then returned to the community for more feedback. The learning loop begins again, thus building community and sharing and developing knowledge within the Community of Practice. Although many schools are beginning to explore this form of collaborative endeavour under a variety of names, such as Personal Learning Teams (PLTs), or Personal Learning Networks (PLNs), or Collegial or Faculty Learning Communities (FLCs), growing and sustaining these communities’ efforts can be difficult. Research into practical experiences and strategies to sustain these groups is the focus of this book. The theoretical underpinnings for the concept of Communities of Practice as developed by the Wenger and the Wenger–Trayner partnership and their colleagues, including the more recent understanding of Landscapes of Practice, Social Learning spaces, online networks and how they support and sustain teachers, in particular Early Career teachers, are articulated in this book. A Value Creation Framework (Wenger-Trayner et al., 2019) for visioning and evaluating the value of CoPs for members and wider stakeholder informed the research in this book and is presented in Chap. 1. Research into the roles of leading Communities of Practice—as a principal or middle-level leader—are shared in Chap. 3, while the importance of the whole school environment in supporting ECTs is explored in Chap. 5. Social Learning Spaces (SLSs) or social networks are the focus of the forthcoming book by Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020), Learning to Make a Difference: Volume I Value creation in social learning spaces. As described in this book, SLSs and social networks include some of the features of a Community of Practice, but without the expectations of continuity and ongoing commitment. The

Preface

xi

SLS features articulated are that they have a focus on people and their participation and that members drive the agenda. Learning is rooted in mutual engagement which pushes the participants’ edge of learning, while meaning and identity remain central in terms of “caring to make a difference” rather than striving for competence in a social practice (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2020). Social learning spaces are not confined to shared geographical spaces, as they include globally distributed networks and online CoPs, such as those presented in Chap. 4 and the networks described in Chaps. 5 and 6. The ubiquity of technology has meant that many forms of social media networks have flourished including Twitter and Facebook. Recent research shows that teachers in the complex and demanding world in which they operate are increasingly turning to social media to fulfil their professional learning needs (Kelly & Antonio, 2016, Lantz-Andersson, 2018; Rosell-Aguilar, 2018). As Chap. 4 will show, these networks are readily available at no cost for participants and are tailored to the needs of the teachers who access them. As practitioners in education over many years, we are well aware of the good intentions that schools and higher education institutions might have in setting up Communities of Practice for their staff. But we are also aware of how some of these groups end up failing over time or operating in less than ideal ways, due to a range of factors. Our concern was to distil the key factors that are needed to both set up and sustain Communities of Practice within a culture of growth (Fullan, 2019), with a particular focus on supporting ECTs. As will become apparent as you read through our book, we see the way forward primarily in terms of implementing and sustaining Communities of Practice, fostered by inspired leadership models of distributed leadership including with middle-level leaders (Gronn, 2010; Jones, & Harvey, 2017). Ultimately we believe our research points towards the importance of developing a shared understanding and mutual commitment with Initial Educational Teaching Institutions (ITEs) about the way they prepare their pre-service teachers for the professional world they will enter and the strategies they need to thrive in this environment. This includes the distinct possibility that they will have a casual rather than ongoing position on graduation or have to move to rural or remote location, and the value they might gain in regard to their professional learning in terms of accessing social media, in particular, Twitter chats. Pre-service teachers need scaffolded experiences during their courses where they can experience what Twitter chats are available and what they have to offer as a professional learning resource (Spencer, Greenhalgh, K., Willet et al., 2020). Chapter 6 highlights the importance of reflectivity as well as the demand on learning leaders and educators to work more collaboratively. As part of a teacher’s professional journey, ITEs need to also embed reflective inquiry into their programmes, where there is an inclusive perspective of norms and worlds, during preparational studies for teaching. Chapter 6 also advocates for in-service professional development, as a career long journey. This inevitably calls for a teacher-education approach, whereby the merging of informal and formal professional learning may in fact be even more realised utilising new models and methods of inquiry.

xii

Preface

Further, as both Chaps. 5 and 6 point out, pre-service teachers and early career teachers need to learn to be proactive in seeking help, whether that be from other teachers within their school or beyond. These teachers need support and mentoring in order to build social capital through networking or put differently, by actively forming relationships with others (Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004; Tonna, Bjerkholt, & Holland, 2017, Fox & Wilson, 2015).

Book Development Process Chapters were sent to researchers and practitioners recognised as leaders in the chapter focus field for peer review. Authors of selected chapters were invited to act on the reviewer’s comments and resubmit their chapters to the book authors. Chapters were checked and final revisions applied based on Springer Publishing Guidelines.

Disclaimers No product or service mentioned in this book is endorsed, nor are any claims made about the capabilities of such products or services. All trademarks are copyrighted to their respective owners. Bernadette Mary Mercieca and Jacquie McDonald

Acknowledgements The authors who contributed to this book acknowledge the contribution of the inspiring educators and school leaders who were the research participants; school staff for facilitating interviews; the online Twitter leaders—who are featured in Chap. 4—and the University of Southern Queensland professional staff who supported the research process including Ethics and Library staff. The reviewers also played an essential role, and we know the authors were very appreciative of the valuable comments provided by the reviewers. We sincerely thank the reviewers for taking the time to read and comment on the original submissions. These contributions were an essential ingredient necessary to improving the content and presentation of the chapters. Thank you also to Michael Fullan for providing the thought provoking Foreword for the book. His leadership and contribution to Communities of Practice and Social Learning is widely acclaimed. Thank you to the staff at Springer SBM Singapore and Australia who provided the necessary process, templates, reminders and project management of the entire process from our first proposal to this final publication. In particular we wish to

Preface

xiii

express our thanks to Lay Peng Ang, Editorial Assistant and Nick Melchior, Senior Editor Education, Australia & New Zealand. Finally, we dedicate this book to our families and to Jacquie’s CoP mentors, Etienne and Bev Wenger-Trayner and Milt Cox, CoP fellow travellers and all social learning leaders. Melbourne, Australia Toowoomba, Australia

Bernadette Mary Mercieca Jacquie McDonald

References AITSL, (2016). Spotlight: What do we know about early career teacher attrition rates in Australia? Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/search?q=spotlight. Bamberry, L. (2011). ‘As Disposable as the Next Tissue Out of the Box …’: Casual teaching and job quality in New South Wales public school education. Journal of Industrial Relations, 53(1), 49–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185610390296. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128. Dicke, T., Elling, J., Schmeck, A., & Leutner, D. (2015). Reducing reality shock: The effects of classroom management skills training on beginning teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 48, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.013. Flemish Department of Education and Training. (2013). Arbeidsmarktrapport prognose 2011–2015. Basisonderwijs en Secundair Onderwijs. Brussels: Author. Ford Timothy, G., Olsen, J., Khojasteh, J., Ware, J., & Urick, A. (2019). The effects of leader support for teacher psychological needs on teacher burnout, commitment, and intent to leave. Journal of Educational Administration, 57(6), 615–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2018-0185. Fox, A., Wilson, E., & Deaney, R. (2011). Beginning teachers’ workplace experiences: Perceptions of and use of support. Vocations and Learning, 4(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-0109046-1. Fullan, M. (2019). Nuance: Why some leaders succeed and others fail (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Gallant, A., & Riley, P. (2017). Early career teacher attrition in Australia: Inconvenient truths about new public management. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(8), 896–913. Gronn, P. (2010). Leadership: Its genealogy, configuration and trajectory. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 42(4), 405–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2010.492959. Jones, S., & Harvey, M. (2017). Revealing the nexus between distributed leadership and communities of practice. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice: Facilitating social learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer. Kelly, N., & Antonio, A. (2016). Teacher peer support in social network sites. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.007. Lantz-Andersson, A., Lundin, M., & Selwyn, N. (2018). Twenty years of online teacher communities: A systematic review of formally-organized and informally-developed professional learning groups. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018. 07.008. McDonald, J., Burch, T., Nagy, J., Star, C., Cox, M., D., & Margetts, F. (2012). Identifying, building and sustaining leadership capacity for communities of practice in Higher Education. Final Report Office for Learning and Teaching. Australia. Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2018). Twitter: A professional development and community of practice tool for teachers. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5334/jim e.452.

xiv

Preface

Spencer, P., Greenhalgh, J., K., R., Willet, B., Koehler, J., & Akcaoglu, M. (2020). Identifying multiple learning spaces within a single teacher-focused Twitter hashtag. Computers & Education, 148 (103809). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103809. Tonna Michelle, A., Bjerkholt, E., & Holland, E. (2017). Teacher mentoring and the reflective practitioner approach. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 6(3), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-04-2017-0032. Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54(2), 143–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170301. Wenger-Trayner, B., Wenger-Trayner, E., Cameron, J., Eryigit-Madzwamuse, S., & Hart, A. (2019). Boundaries and boundary objects: An evaluation framework for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 321–338. Wenger-Trayner, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Hutchinson, S., Kubiak, C., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2014). Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning. Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. http://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/. Accessed 10 February 2020. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2020). Learning to make a difference (Vol. 1: Value creation in social learning spaces). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Contents

1 What Is a Community of Practice? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jacquelin McDonald and Bernadette Mary Mercieca Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Theoretical Underpinnings of Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evolution of the Concept of Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phase 1—Apprenticeship Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phase 2—Communities of Practice as Learning Partnerships . . . . . . . . Phase 3—Communities of Practice Operating Across Landscapes of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Are Communities of Practice? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Types of Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Learning Loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Value Creation Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Life Cycles of Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustaining Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evolving Social Learning Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Learning Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Takeaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers . . . Jacquelin McDonald and Bernadette Mary Mercieca Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Value Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers . . . . . . . . . The Tyranny of Distance: Locating Self Within a Vast Landscape of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Early Career Teacher Identity in a Rural or Remote Context . . . . . . . . . . . Early Career Teacher Leadership Opportunities in Rural or Remote Contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Research Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 3 5 5 6 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 16 16 17 17 18 21 21 23 25 26 27 28 29 xv

xvi

Contents

Research Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Three Years on—The Early Career Journey Within Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Thriving in a Supportive Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Learning New Skills and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher Agency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scaffolding Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion and Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Takeaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bernadette Mary Mercieca and Jacquelin McDonald Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Role of the Principal in Sustaining Communities of Practice . . . . . . . Holding the Reins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ensuring All Voices Are Heard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ethical Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Leader as Learner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Honouring People’s Histories and Contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distributed Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Champion Role in Sponsoring Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . The Role of Middle-Level Leaders in Sustaining Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Research Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Holding the Reins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distributed Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustaining Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion and Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Takeaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bernadette Mary Mercieca Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Learning Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustaining Online Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ten “Super Passionate” Educators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Helping and Mentoring Start-Ups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Keeping the Flame Lit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Operational Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Planning for the Chat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30 32 32 34 35 36 38 40 40 45 45 47 47 48 49 49 50 50 52 53 53 54 55 55 58 59 60 61 61 65 65 66 73 74 75 76 77 78 78 78

Contents

Advertising the Chat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Saving the Chat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Personal Requirements—Building Rapport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Taking a Genuine Interest in Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Community Within the Chat: Around the Campfire or Watering Hole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Twitter, the Great Leveller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Professional Learning in the Palm of Your Hand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Very Social Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sustaining the Chat Facilitators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Takeaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online Twitter Chat Leader: Brett Salakas #AussieED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online Twitter Chat Leader: Rachael Lehr #PrimarySTEMChat . . . . . . . . Online Twitter Chat Leader: Craig Kemp #Whatisschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online Twitter Chat Leader: Dina Pham #includeEdau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online Twitter Chat Leaders Steven Kolber #edureading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Online Twitter Chat Leader: Angie Taylor #pstchat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Laura Thomas, Melissa Tuytens, Geert Devos, and Ruben Vanderlinde The research project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Problem statement and central concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher characteristics as important precursors of retention . . . . . . . . . Collegial Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Social Network Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Network Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Social Network Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Network Research Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Network Research Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . One Measurement Moment or Follow-up Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Main Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Network Size, Frequency of Support and Perceived Usefulness (RO1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Network Structure and Network Content (RO2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Network Change (RO3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Induction Support as a School-Wide Responsibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ECTs’ Access to Professional Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Power of School Leaders’ Transformational Abilities . . . . . . . . . .

xvii

80 80 80 81 81 84 84 85 85 86 88 88 90 92 93 94 95 97 99 99 99 100 100 101 103 105 106 106 107 107 108 108 111 111 113 116 117 117 118 119

xviii

Contents

Links with Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations for Policy and Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Policy-Related Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications Directed Towards the Actors in the School . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications Directed Towards Pedagogical Advisory Services and Providers of Teacher Education Programmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Takeaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities: Models and Methods—A Northern Ireland Reflection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Celia O’Hagan Introduction-Defining Professional Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reflective Inquiry as Part of the Professional Learning Model . . . . . . . . . . Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Community-Based Teacher Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Review of Findings from Scoping Study Phase 1—Desk Research . . . . . . Review of Findings from Scoping Study Phase 2—Participatory Action Research for Professional Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Critique of Existing and Emerging Models of Professional Learning . . . . The Individual Professional Learning (IPL) Model—Level 1 . . . . . . . . The Mutual Professional Learning (MPL) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The L-PAR Embedded Model (Leadership-Participatory Action Research) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Key Takeaways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bernadette Mary Mercieca and Jacquelin McDonald Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Transformative Role of the Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Significant Role of Middle-Level Leaders Within a Distributed Leadership Model in Supporting and Encouraging Communities of Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Importance of a Whole School Community to Support the Professional Learning and Social Well-Being of Early Career Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Ways in Which Early Career Teachers Can Be Supported Through Communities of Practice to Advance Their Professional Careers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Ways in Which ECTs Can Support Themselves to Advance Their Professional Life and Remain in the Profession . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

120 121 121 122 123 124 125 126 133 134 135 140 143 146 147 149 153 153 154 155 156 156 161 161 163 163

165

165

166 168

Contents

xix

The Value of Online Networks to Support a Wide Network of Teachers and How Twitter Chat Leaders Sustain Them . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Recommendations, Further Opportunities and Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

Authors and Contributors

Geert Devos is a Professor in educational administration at the Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, Belgium. He leads the research centre Bellon that studies educational policy and leadership in schools. Jacquie McDonald is an Honorary Associate Professor at the University of Southern Queensland (USQ) Australia and a higher education Community of Practice consultant. Since 2006 she has facilitated, researched, published and coached the implementation of higher education Communities of Practice, both nationally and internationally. She previously worked for over 26 years as a Learning and Teaching Designer at USQ designing online and distance learning courses and programs. Since 2006 she led the successful implementation of Communities of Practice (CoP) at USQ, which was recognised by a 2009 Australian Universities Quality Agency commendation and 2009 Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) Citation. She led a number of institutional and national fellowships and grants to research and provide resources for leadership of Communities of Practice. She is a member of the Australian Learning and Teaching Fellows (ALTF) Alumni and has been invited by national and international universities to facilitate Community of Practice workshops and contribute to CoP initiatives. Jacquie co-facilitates the “Social Learning Leaders” online CoP and the USQ Research Supervisor CoP. Publications include Springer (2017) co-edited books, Communities of Practice: Facilitating Social Learning in Higher Education and Implementing Communities of Practice in Higher Education: Dreamers and Schemers. Bernadette Mary Mercieca (ORCID: 0000-0002-4357-806X) graduated with her Doctor of Philosophy in September 2018 from the University of Southern Queensland. The title of her thesis was “Companions on the Journey: An exploration of the value of Communities of Practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia.” Bernadette currently works as a sessional educator at Australian Catholic University, Melbourne teaching Mathematics and Religious Education to pre-service teachers. Prior to and concurrent with this work, Bernadette had a long career as a secondary school teacher, most recently at a Catholic boys’ school where she was a subject and e-learning co-ordinator. With this background, xxi

xxii

Authors and Contributors

she has an ongoing interest in teacher education and the development of appropriate support networks, particularly online ones, for beginning teachers in secondary schools. As an early researcher, Bernadette has several publications to her name. She was recognised by the Australian Council for Educational Leadership (ACEL) in 2019 as a New Voice Scholar in educational research. Celia O’Hagan has over 20 years of experience in teaching and educational leadership in Northern Ireland. She has received recognition nationally for her work as an educational leader and teacher both through nominations for awards and for achievements in high profile teacher education policy projects. She has managed significant funding and initiatives that led to improvements in educational policies and teacher education throughout her career. Celia is an active teacher educator working to develop professional standards up to master’s level. She believes all teachers should have the opportunity to advance to master’s level for early and continuing professional development. She has managed educational master’s degrees in Northern Ireland for the last 15 years of her career and currently supports in-service professional learning regionally, nationally and internationally for Stranmillis University College. Laura Thomas (ORCID: 0000-0002-3725-187X) is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, Belgium. Her research focuses on beginning teachers’ school network in primary education. Melissa Tuytens (ORCID: 0000-0001-9934-9445) is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Educational Studies, Ghent University, Belgium. Her current research interests include Human Resource Management (HRM) in schools, school policy, school leadership and teacher professional development. Ruben Vanderlinde (ORCID: 0000-0002-4912-3410) is an Associate Professor at the Department of Educational Studies at Ghent University in Belgium. His research interests are in the field of educational innovation, teacher training and professionalisation and the integration of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) in education. At Ghent University, he coordinates the research group ‘Teacher Education & Professional Development’ (www.lopo.ugent.be); and he is the academic responsible for the Teacher Education program. Dr. Ruben Vanderlinde is methodologically experienced in mixed-method research and founding member of InFo-TED (International Forum for Teacher Educator Development).

Chapter 1

What Is a Community of Practice? Jacquelin McDonald and Bernadette Mary Mercieca

Abstract Communities of Practice (CoPs) are groups of people who come together to share their practice and learn with and from each other. They are united by a domain or joint enterprise and a shared concern. As they continue to meet, their knowledge deepens and they become more skilled as they participate in learning loops, where shared practice is taken back to the workplace, implemented and then returned to the community for more feedback, then the learning loop begins again. Although many secondary schools and higher education institutions are beginning to explore this form of collaborative endeavour—under a variety of names such as Personal Learning Teams (PLTs) or Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) or Collegial or Faculty Learning Communities (FLCs)—it is not always easy to sustain these groups over a number of years or ensure that they continue to develop and grow, which is the focus of this book. This chapter provides the theoretical underpinnings for the concept of CoPs as developed by Wenger and the Wenger-Trayner partnership and other CoP researchers and practitioners, which informs the implementation of CoPs in secondary and higher education. Discussion includes the more recent understanding of Landscapes of Practice, Social Learning Spaces and online networks that are illustrated in other chapters. Practical advice is provided on the different forms of CoPs as they have emerged in higher education and secondary schools, how they function and can be evaluated. The theoretical underpinnings for the concept of CoPs provide the framework for subsequent discussion in the following chapters, about how CoPs support Early Career Teachers (ECTs) as they begin their professional teaching career. This will be more clearly articulated in Chapter 2. Keywords Community of Practice · Higher education · Secondary schools · Landscapes of Practice · Social Learning Space · Online networks · Leadership

Introduction What are Communities of Practices (CoPs)? Can they be cultivated, and what actions of members, facilitators and stakeholders foster their sustainability? The concept of a Community of Practice is one that has become popular in recent decades to

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_1

1

2

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

describe a particular way that people can gather to share ideas and improve their practice, although the phenomenon it describes is age-old (Wenger-Trayner & WengerTrayner, 2018). While various alternative terms such as Professional Learning Teams (PLTs), Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), Learning or Collegial Networks or Faculty Learning Communities (FLCs) have been used to describe such gatherings within educational circles, the particular term Community of Practice (CoP) that is the focus of this book has its origin in the seminal work of Lave and Wenger (1991). They describe a process known as situated learning whereby people learn through the work environment in which they are situated and the relationships they developed with those around them. The concept of situated learning is particularly relevant when researching how Early Career Teachers (ECTs) are inducted into their school environment, and will be explored further in Chapter 2. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) describe CoPs as, “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly” (p. 3). They note that in their experience people prefer to belong to a focused CoP with others facing similar challenges such as the CoPs of the ECTs interviewed in Chapter 2, or the online cohorts of discipline or primary/secondary teachers such as those described in Chapter 4. CoPs thus have much to contribute across a broad range of educational contexts-online, primary and secondary schools and higher education institutions. Although the title and idea of Communities of Practice is widely accepted in industry, business and government, notably in terms of knowledge management, it has not been extensively adopted within the domain of education—either in schools or higher education. The implementation of CoPs has been a focus of the authors in the field of higher education (McDonald, 2014; McDonald & Star, 2006; McDonald et al., 2012) and secondary and online education (Mercieca, 2017, 2018; Mercieca & Kelly, 2018). As passionate educators who have engaged in joint research into how CoPs support ECTs, and who have interacted with colleagues keen to establish and/or sustain their own CoPs, the idea of this book was generated. We believe this is worth exploring, given that learning is at the core of both CoPs and education. Each of us comes from an educational background, initially in primary and secondary schools respectively, one author more recently in higher education and the other has extensive experience in setting up and facilitating higher education CoPs. This extensive experience and passion for learning is supported and informed by CoP’s theory and practice presented below. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) highlight the importance of CoPs in terms of the effect they can have on educational practices: • Internally: How to organise educational experiences that ground school learning in practice through participation in communities around subject matters • Externally: How to connect the experience of students to actual practice through peripheral forms of participation beyond the walls of the school • Over the lifetime of students: How to serve the lifelong learning needs of students by organising Communities of Practice focused on topics of continuing interest to students beyond the initial schooling period.

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

3

However, while a number of secondary schools and higher education institutions have attempted to set up collaborative forms of teacher professional development, we believe that only a small number have been able to successfully sustain them effectively over a number of years. It is not easy to maintain the motivation of busy teachers and higher education staff to engage in collaborative ventures if particular features are not set in place to support them and if they do not find the experience to be worthwhile and engaging. Initial enthusiasm can wane and it not unusual to see particular CoPs fade away or function in less than ideal ways such as falling into standard format meetings. Features contributing to CoP sustainability, such as creating and supporting effective social learning spaces (Chapter 4), distributed leadership (Chapter 3), developing collegial networks (Chapter 5) and fostering reflective inquiry (Chapter 6), will be addressed in these chapters. This chapter explores the psycho-social theoretical underpinnings then the evolution of the concept of a Community of Practice (Table 1.3) as described by Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder (2002) and its later developments as described by the Wenger-Trayner partnership and their colleagues (Wenger, Trayner, & de Laat 2011; Wenger-Trayner, Fenton-O’Creevy, Hutchinson, Kubiak, & Wenger-Trayner, 2014; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018, 2020). The theoretical underpinnings and the Value Creation Framework (VCF), which can be used to vision and evaluate how the CoP creates value for members and other stakeholders are briefly explored to provide foundational Community of Practice knowledge that informs the research in subsequent chapters. Research that articulates the concept of CoPs has been our focus in exploring ways of learning, so enjoy the learning journey throughout this book, as we learn with and from research into Communities of Practice. The aim of this overview is to provide you, the reader, with a theoretical foundation when reading following chapters that research the variety of ways that CoPs can be established and sustained within various educational context, and in particular, how they support ECTs.

Theoretical Underpinnings of Communities of Practice Central to an understanding of Communities of Practice is the importance of social learning. Schools and higher educational institutions are social systems of interacting entities. However, while educators traditionally have interacted on a daily basis with the students they teach, many have little opportunity to professionally engage with the broad base of their colleagues. Nelson (2015) captures this professional isolation where he graphically describes: Closed door isolation: from each other, from ideas, from learning theory and educational policy as they’ve translated into real teaching and from ourselves as teachers as we try to learn. Over time, this deafening isolation dampens the imagination and initiative we brought with us as new teachers, and the silence amongst us grows. (para.1)

4

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

The foundational work of Russian psychologist, Vygotsky (1978, 1981) and subsequent developments by psychologists and sociologists such as Cole and Scribner (1974), Daniels (2008), Heidegger (1978), and Wertsch (2009) are important in understanding how educators learn. Although much of this earlier work was related to how children learn, the insights are equally applicable to adults. As Heidegger (1978) suggests, “the most important thing to be learnt is learning itself and, to achieve this, teachers need to be even more teachable than their students” (p. 380). He stresses that the prime means of learning for both students and teachers is dialogue. One of Vygotsky’s (1978, 1981) key insights was that mediation was central to the concept of a person’s development, in the sense that individuals are influenced by and influence the social environment they operate in. In contrast to socio-psychological approaches which focused on internal experiences alone, Vygotsky conceptualised processes that involved the transformation of socially shared activities into internalised processes (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996). A person simultaneously integrates internally what they have experienced in a social setting and constructs new knowledge. Daniels (2008), in his review of Vygotsky’s theory, highlights two main implications that emerge in an educational context: firstly, that individuals are active agents in their environment and secondly that development takes place in the sociocultural context in which they are situated. The importance of teacher agency is the focus of many later writers such as Priestley, Edwards, Priestley, and Miller (2012), Biesta, Tedder, and Biesta (2006) and Pignatelli (1993) and will be specifically addressed in Chapters 2 and 4. The learning which occurs in socially and culturally shaped contexts and involves reflective learning with one’s peers will be the focus of Chapter 6. These ideas are at the heart of an understanding of CoPs. While attending conferences and learning from experts outside of the school can be helpful to a teacher in stimulating their ideas, it is the regular dialogue with their colleagues who understand the student cohort and the particular culture of the school that has the potential for their best learning (Lieberman, Campbell, & Yashkina, 2016; Mercieca, 2018). A later development for Vygotsky and his followers was the idea of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), which he defined as, “the distance between the actual developmental level” and “the level of potential development” of a person in collaboration with more capable peers (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996, p. 86). It is a way of understanding how a person learns through social and participatory learning. Teachers operate within their ZPD when they receive modelling and feedback to help them meet the challenges of teaching (Gallimore, Goldenberg, & Weisner, 1993). Kuusisaari (2014) points to the key features of Vygotsky’s ZPD theory as being, “collaboration between capable peers, fruitful interconnection of theoretical concepts and everyday experience, and meeting the goal of change in a collaborative process” (p. 48). The outcome of this process, she suggests, for the individual is greater capability or competence, while for the group is what she calls collective learning where all members of the group strive for a common goal or engage in joint enterprise activities. Her research based on Vygotsky’s ZPD included videoing and transcribing teacher participants’ dialogue during three different collaborative meetings. She found that the group that was based on further development of defined ideas and the questioning that went with this was most fruitful in producing successful

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

5

development in terms of teachers gaining new knowledge and practices. Those groups that accepted new ideas too readily did not show the same degree of development. This has implications for the type of reflective interactions and learning loops that occur within a CoP that are explored in later chapters.

Evolution of the Concept of Communities of Practice The term Communities of Practice emerged from research into learning at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Centre in California in the 1980s (Tight, 2015). As noted below in sect. “Phase 1—Apprenticeship Model”, the work of Lave and Wenger (1991) that investigated the apprenticeship model of learning showed that, rather than the novice apprentices learning from the experienced craftsperson, learning took place through a complex set of social relationships. A whole social network, including other apprentices, supported the novice apprentice’s learning journey within the particular practice field. This eventually led to membership as a fully fledged member of that community. Recognition of how learning was supported by all members of specified practice, was articulated in the term Community of Practice which indicates a whole community supporting the development of a new practitioner. Wenger et al. (2002) describe Communities of Practice as: Groups of people who share a concern … and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis … [As they] accumulate knowledge; they become informally bound by the value that they find in learning together. Over time … [t]hey become a community of practice. (pp. 4–5)

When reflecting on the concept of Communities of Practice, Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2017, v–vii) say it has had a long and notably diverse career, both as part of a social learning theory and as an approach to enabling learning. They suggest the theory has gone through three phases, with each transition building on the prior phase, as will be briefly outlined below.

Phase 1—Apprenticeship Model In the first phase, the concept of Community of Practice (CoP) was derived from studies of apprenticeship in various contexts, where a novice apprentice started on the periphery, then had an inbound learning trajectory into an existing practice that was defined by that community. Lave and Wenger’s (1991) earliest research began with a close study of the way learning occurs in apprenticeship situations. With the American Indian community of the Yucatec midwives and the Vai and Gola tailors from West Africa, for example, information was not conveyed so much by direct instruction as by the apprentice watching the master and other more experienced workers at work, or the Indian girls hearing stories from their mothers and

6

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

grandmothers and observing their practices. The young potential midwives and the apprentices moved from peripheral to full participation in the communities they were involved in as they gradually learnt to do increasingly complex tasks: Legitimate peripheral participation provides a way to pass on the necessary knowledge and practices to the next generation. It provides a way to speak about the relations between newcomers and old-timers, and about activities, identities, artefacts and communities of knowledge and practice. It concerns the process by which newcomers become part of a Community of Practice. (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 29)

As another way to explain this learning journey, Wenger-Trayner and WengerTrayner (2017) use the idea of learning trajectories to articulate the learning path taken by apprentices as they move from the novice to expert, with their learning facilitated by the whole community. Within the educational context, ECTs experience a similar learning trajectory as they start their professional teaching learning journey at university, then, as in the cases represented in Chapter 2, they joined a secondary school learning and teaching community in a rural college. Their learning trajectory was supported by a community of fellow ECTs, mentors, other more experienced teachers, two situated CoPs, external contacts such as online communities, and various professional development opportunists. Learning trajectories is a useful term to visualise the ECTs, and indeed, our own learning trajectories, as we move from novice to expert educators.

Phase 2—Communities of Practice as Learning Partnerships In the second phase, the CoP is not taken as given. It evolves as members interact and develop a learning partnership over time. This is a significant shift from apprenticeship communities (such as midwives) defining the required learning for a novice member to be accepted as an expert practitioner in that community. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2017) suggest that rather than the community defining learning, it is learning that defines the community. During this phase individuals and organisations start to intentionally establish and cultivate CoPs as a collaborative and/or strategic learning approach. This intentional use of CoPs is explored in subsequent chapters such as Chaps. 2 and 6, and the role of leadership in creating and sustaining CoPs in Chap. 3.

Phase 3—Communities of Practice Operating Across Landscapes of Practice In the third phase, the focus moved from becoming competent in a single practice field to developing social learning capability across a broader landscape of practice. We are all engaged in a diverse range of CoPs, even if we do not label them CoPs. For

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

7

example, we may be primary, secondary, or university educators, alumni, gardening club members or soccer parents. We may be very competent in one practice field, such as secondary teaching, however, we may also have some knowledge of how we can operate across a broader landscape of practice, such as primary or university teaching. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2017) say that this phase identifies the many Communities and Practices in which we cannot claim full membership or competence, but about which we can claim some level of knowledgeability that informs our participation. From such a perspective, learning trajectories cut across a number of CoPs in the landscape. It is not only a journey into the centre of one as noted in the Phase one apprenticeship model. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2017) suggest that: In the complex world of the 21st century, the interplay of these two forms of participation— competence and knowledgeability—becomes central to what it means to know in practice. (p. vi)

It is interesting to explore if ECTs have an experience similar to the phases of CoPs as they commence their university study to become competent educators. Phase 1, curriculum study at university, Phase 2, graduating and learning with others as they move into their teaching practice and Phase 3, becoming competent and knowledgeable across a number of disciplines, class levels and city or rural contexts. It is worth reflecting on our own learning journeys. We can also consider our own professional and social learning—have we moved through similar phases, and where do we consider ourselves competent, and where are we knowledgeable in our landscape of practice?

What Are Communities of Practice? While the concept of Communities of Practice has evolved through different phases, three key elements of Communities of Practice—building community, location in a domain of knowledge and the sharing of practice—have remained constant. Practitioners are at the centre of the CoP approach and they drive the learning. The community is made up of the practitioners who care about the domain and learn with and from each other, as together they develop a learning community. The domain of knowledge, such as how to differentiate lessons, creates a common ground and sense of common identity, and builds member capacity, and a shared practice develops as members learn with and from each other to become effective in the domain. For example, for ECTs, knowledge, teaching strategies and innovations are shared, and this saves time and reinventing the wheel. They have the opportunity to learn from more experienced teachers in what Kemmis et al. (2014) calls tacit knowledge—that rich depth of untapped knowledge that resides in both individuals and organisations such as schools. As noted in Chapter 2, research findings from ECT interviews revealed a sense of agency gained from the tacit knowledge that had been shared within the community. The ECTs felt confident in their teaching practice built on the

8

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

strategies they had developed through their CoPs to the stage where they stepped up into leadership positions. As the research shows in Chapter 2, member participation in a CoP where these key elements are well-aligned, can significantly contribute to the members’ agency, confidence and ability to do their job, both individually and as a learning community. The domain provides a common focus that members care about; community builds relationships that enable collective learning; and practice locates the learning in what ECTs do in their daily teaching practice. As Pedersen, Brown, and Nash (2017) emphasise, “passion drives practice” (p. 10). Fourteen years of experience researching, participating in, and facilitating higher education CoPs by one of the authors (McDonald) has emphasised the importance of building a sense of community for the members. The engaged membership provides the context and opportunity to develop domain knowledge and share practice. It takes time to build this sense of community, but evidence that it is achievable is demonstrated by one CoP member who stated—“When I was first invited (to the CoP) as a fairly cynical, jaded and tired core course leader, the idea of another two hour meeting was not one that I was enamoured with.” The same member came bouncing into the CoP a year later saying, “I love Communities of Practice–I know I’m not alone” (McDonald et al., 2008). An illustration of the relationships and unity that can develop from belonging to a Community of Practice is seen in Fig. 1.1. The three elements—domain, community and practice—have remained foundational elements of a CoP (Wenger-Trayner, 2018; Wenger, 1998). They have been used successfully by one of the authors (McDonald) since 2006 as an organising structure for nurtured, higher education CoPs that typically run for 60 or 90 min. However, these elements can be equally applicable in primary or secondary school contexts. The order of each of the three elements is (re)arranged to suit the community and activities. A sample structure is illustrated in Table 1.1.

Fig. 1.1 Community of Practice (Reprinted with permission Simon Kneebone)

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

9

Table 1.1 Community of Practice agenda template Activity

Time

Welcome and community time

5 min

Food and fellowship

30 min

Introductory activities: (Title)

5–15 min

Building our domain knowledge: (Title & presenter)

30–40 min

Sharing our practice: (Members learning with and from each other)

30–40 min

Next meeting: ______ (Date & time) ______ (Venue) Resource Reaburn and McDonald (2017)

This structure has provided a consistent framework for monthly meetings and for addressing member priorities and sharing practice. It has proved robust in a range of different CoPs and university contexts. Most CoP meetings are one to two hours, usually monthly, as decided by the members. As noted in Reaburn and McDonald (2017), this CoP structure, based on the three core elements, is effective in building a domain of knowledge, through invited speakers, sharing and discussing research literature; members sharing practice, based on how their experience relates to discussion topic; and developing the sense of community of people by having time during the meeting, usually with refreshments, to interact informally to foster the social fabric of learning. As the CoP is starting, members engage in identifying and prioritising practice issues that they would like to investigate within the community, and this bottom-up process ensures the CoP agenda is member-driven. The face-toface “community building” element is modified in online communities, with time at start up for members to introduce themselves and share a little about their CoP, also having a designated place to post profiles. Social distancing during the Covid19 lockdown and travel restrictions provided both challenges and opportunities for CoPs, with existing online communities providing familiar community connections, and face-to-face CoPs reorganising to move and sustain their CoP on using various technology platforms, and trying out collaborative sharing strategies such as break out group discussions and online sharing of resources and practice. This will be explored more in Chapter 4.

Types of Communities of Practice Research into higher education CoPs and the impact of facilitation or leadership activities (McDonald et al. 2012) identified different types of CoPs— organic, nurtured/supported and created/intentional. Intentional CoPs, as profiled in Chapter 2, are created to satisfy a particular organisational need or strategy. Nurtured CoPs are usually created and facilitated by members to focus on either a cohort interest, such as ECTs, or a topic such as student leadership. While they

10

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

Table 1.2 Types of CoP and contextual issues Type of CoP

Organic

Nurtured/supported

Created/intentional

Structure

Bottom-up

Modified bottom-up

Top-down

Support level

Minimal

Subsidised

Provided

Membership

Voluntary

Voluntary/suggested

Encouraged

Themes

Discipline-related

Discipline or issue related Guided issues and cross-discipline

Agenda

Self-determined

Self-determined/steered

Guided theme

Timing for outcomes

Self-determined

Self-determined and funding-related

Short term rather than long term

McDonald et al. (2012). Identifying, building, and sustaining leadership capacity for Communities of Practice in higher education. Final Report Office for Learning and Teaching (p. 23)

are member-driven, with the focus determined by the members, they may have institutional support. Organic CoPs usually evolve through members sharing issues or concerns, but they do not engage formally with the institutional leadership for support. They may operate in various social learning spaces such as Social Learning Spaces described later in this chapter and in Chapter 4. The different types of CoPs are presented in Table 1.2. Research findings established that CoP facilitators face different challenges depending on their experience, context, and type of CoP (McDonald et al. 2012). Research participants also reflected that once they were aware of the concept of CoPs, they were able to identify their social learning activities as Communities of Practice and delve into existing theory and practice to inform their activities. It is useful to take time to reflect on your own practice to identify the types of CoPs you have participated in and what features add value (or not) to the community, knowledge domain and practice of those CoPs. Over the last few decades there has been a significant increase in the number of journal articles, books, book chapters, conference papers and online documents mentioning CoPs or using the term Communities of Practice in the title of the documents (Tight, 2015). There is a range of literature on establishing, maintaining and facilitating CoPs noted in the reference section, and Chapter 3 further articulates CoP leadership research findings.

Learning Loops Continuing the focus on the learning in a Community of Practice, let us now consider how it is different from top-down, didactic transfer of information and how this learning can be fostered and measured. Within the community members share ideas, try them out in their practice, share their reflections on what worked (or not), then

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

11

together, members explore this learning, take away ideas to apply in their own practice. They then return to the community with their findings, reflect, share, refine and retry back in their classroom. Thus, the learning cycles back and forth through the CoP, in what Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) call learning loops. The reflections or stories members share are situated in their practice field, or domain, such as how to differentiate a subject or how to ask more open-ended questions and become a valuable resource for other members of the community. This cyclical, learning loop process, encapsulates the CoP approach of learning from and with each other to improve practice. The members drive and share the learning, and this creates value for their personal and professional identity, as well as their wider context or institution. Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) see the concept of value creation as representing a significant shift from traditional ways of understanding learning. It places the emphasis on the experience of learners rather than on knowledge, skill or curriculum as stuff. It is very different from the “closed doors” described by Nelson (2015, para. 1).

Value Creation Framework Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020), Wenger et al. (2011), and WengerTrayner and Wenger-Trayner (2017) have developed a Value Creation Framework that provides a structure for people to vision and plan for the stages in establishing a CoP, and also to capture how learning creates value for members, their institution and various stakeholders. As shown in Fig. 1.2, the Value Creation Framework focuses on planning, or collecting evidence of value, during each of the unfolding CoP cycles or phases. In the immediate value phase there may be the excitement of meeting with professional colleagues; hearing new ideas may trigger potential value from the interaction with others; applied value is when these ideas are tried out in practice; and realised value is how these ideas have changed and/or improved practice. Situated around the learning activities within these CoP phases are the conversations with broader stakeholders to profile the strategic value of CoP activities; the various support and resources that provide enabling value; and if CoP activities transform member’s identities and practice this is transformative value. The Value Creation Framework can be used for envisioning what activities or learning members would like to happen at each phase, and what conditions will enable these aspirations to be achieved. Qualitative and/or quantitative data can be collected on the activities and effect of community activities at each phase. Collecting value creation stories is one approach to illustrate the impact of CoP activities on members and their practice. The authors used the VCF to formulate semi-structured interviews to collect and analyse the value and impact of Communities of Practice for early career teachers in an Australian rural college. The findings of that research are presented in Chapter 2, revealing the value to ECTs of the different phases of CoP activities, and in Chapter 3, the strategic and enabling value provided by senior staff in leadership roles.

12

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

Fig. 1.2 Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner (2014), the Value Creation Framework (VCF), Strategic evaluation of network activities. Accessed 21 June 2020, https://wengertrayner.com/res ources/publications/strategic-evaluation-of-network-activities/

Life Cycles of Communities of Practice When considering creating a Community of Practice facilitators face different challenges depending on their experience, the context, the type of CoP and the particular phase of their CoP’s development. Research by McDonald et al. (2012) identified the different phases of Australian higher education CoPs which are shown in Fig. 1.3.

Fig. 1.3 Phases of a community of practice McDonald et al. (2012). Identifying, building, and sustaining leadership capacity for Communities of Practice in higher education. Final Report Office for Learning and Teaching (p. 23)

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

13

Although this appears to be a step by step process, each CoP will evolve differently to suit their context and the needs of its members. Wenger-Trayner and WengerTrayner (2018) note that, “there is no recipe for a successful Community of Practice” (p. 20), however, drawing on research, McDonald et al. (2012) identified key issues associated with each phase, which are worth considering when establishing a CoP. Table 1.3 provides an example of how the key issues for each phase were addressed in an Australian University but could be equally applicable in a primary or secondary school. When considering the issues associated with each phase, constant communication and consultation with members and stakeholders will enable the CoP to evolve to serve the members’ learning needs and aspirations. Wenger-Trayner and WengerTrayner (2018) suggest that CoPs have a lifecycle starting with people already involved in the practice domain seeing the potential of learning together in a CoP. The next stage is coalescing as the community comes together, developing the three CoP elements of community, domain and sharing practice. The CoP is then maturing as a sustained learning partnership with an established identity. The next stage is evolving, as new members and issues are addressed. The final stage is transforming where the CoP may link with other learning partners, change focus or if no longer needed, disperse. These lifecycles have strong parallels to the phases and key issues that emerged from higher education CoP research presented in Table 1.3 (Reaburn & McDonald, 2017), and CoP phases and/or life cycles in various contexts is an area for further research.

Sustaining Communities of Practice Based on seven and eleven years of experience as the “drivers” and facilitators of CoPs within their respective universities, Reaburn & McDonald (2017) found that the sustainability of CoPs within higher education revolved around four critical factors: firstly, that CoP facilitators were well read in the theory of CoPs; secondly, they had regular and open communication with the CoP members at and between meetings and the leadership/decision-makers within the university and thirdly, there was ongoing mentoring and skill development for each of the CoP facilitators and finally that the drive, energy and commitment of the CoP facilitator was possibly the most critical factor in CoP success. These findings are based on evolution and the author’s experience of nurtured, higher education CoPs. The CoP approach articulated by Wenger (1998) and Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2017, 2020) are general and thus can inform the implementation of CoPs in both secondary and higher education. However, their application in various types of CoPs, such as presented in Table 1.2 and different contexts such as schools and online communities require further research. An Australian example of the implementation of Communities of Practice in secondary and primary schools is the Victorian Government’s Education initiative to champion a CoP approach, where networks and system leaders share knowledge, experience, and resources (Bastow Institute of Educational Leadership, 2019).

14

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

Table 1.3 Phases and key issues associated with a nurtured cop within higher education Phase

Key issues

Examples from CQU

1 Initiation

Topic or cohort focus Identify the “spark” or reason to connect practitioners or the cohort Scope landscape for CoP alignment with university goals Identify senior leaders to sponsor/champion the CoP Identify resources such as administrative support Identify potential members

Identify key individuals who exhibit “best practice”, or cohorts of staff identified as benefiting from “connecting” Familiarise key individuals with university planning documents Identify senior leaders with an interest in the CoP domain Brainstorm potential CoP members

2 Creation

Get buy-in from potential members and senior leader(s) Sell the CoP Get the critical mass Leverage local knowledge and contacts Nurture the spark Seven design principles

Make potential CoP members (e-mail or face-to-face) and senior leaders (face-to-face) aware of benefits of membership Using the seven design principles, call an initial face-to-face (with videoconferencing if available) meeting Ensure a credible core group of “leaders in practice” are engaged

3 Infancy

Nurture and develop membership Ensure value from membership and attendance at meetings Build trust Build CoP profile Ensure credibility of core members and champions/convenors Back-channelling (CoP convenor/facilitator(s) regularly check with CoP members that the CoP is meeting their needs and to identify any group dynamic issues or other problems are not arising)

Create an e-mail list of CoP members Keep them informed of activities/speakers well in advance Communicate between meetings Create a sense of trust, transparency and openness within meetings Invite senior leaders or experts in practice within or outside the university to share practice at meetings Ensure a credible core group of “leaders in practice” are engaged and foster development of CoP newcomers Share and celebrate success stories through media such as newsletters and reports

4 Maturing/ Sustaining

Avoid university leveraging or taking over Membership changes New member induction Protect the “space” Keep the role of CoP focused

Educate senior leaders on need for CoPs to remain autonomous to bureaucratic imperatives Ensure CoP activities are member-driven Welcome new members and encourage their interaction and involvement at every meeting Ensure the domain of the CoP is the focus (continued)

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

15

Table 1.3 (continued) Phase

Key issues

5 Recreating Reassess the critical issues or new trigger Evolve the membership Rebuild the critical mass Renegotiate the relationship with university

Examples from CQU Keep all stakeholders informed and engaged in all aspects of decision-making Involve CoP members in reflective practice and evaluation of CoP activities and outcomes Keep senior leadership involved and informed of CoP activities

Reprinted with permission from Reaburn and McDonald (2017, p. 133)

In 2017, seven primary and two secondary, nine schools in the Hume/Moreland network formed a CoP to collaboratively improve student learning outcomes in numeracy which has since spread to different jurisdictions. The CoP started the journey by developing a common understanding of what their role was going to be in the improvement process. Using an inquiry cycle, members of the CoP collected evidence of student achievement and learning. Working together, the nine schools were able to pull together a summary of the key elements and findings to identify common goals for the CoP. The nine schools used common data sets such as the National Assessment Program.1 The biggest support for success of the CoP was having an authentic purpose that was articulated within the school’s Annual Implementation Plan and School Strategic Plan, thus ensuring CoP activities were directly aligned with school priorities. As noted in Chapter 2, time for professional learning, in line with the CoP’s focus, was prioritised and as a result, became an authentic part of the daily routine, rather than an “additional” activity. The Principles outlined below illustrate what is required for a successful CoP: • Create an effective network that collaboratively develops a culture of learning excellence that improves student outcomes. • Have an authentic purpose that is shared. • Establish protocols and use of common language. • Use a range of data and evidence to inform decision-making, using the FISO Improvement Cycle. • Build a culture of collective responsibility for professional growth (Wilson, 2019). Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) suggest that there are several key factors to consider for the sustaining of a community. These factors include—not necessarily in order of importance—the rhythm and pace of meetings and events; modes of meeting at a distance, face-to-face, or a combination of the two; the treatment of newcomers and old-timers in the community; and the design of activities for generating productive conversations. Each community will address these factors as appropriate to their own unique context, however, a solid knowledge of CoP theory, paying 1 The

National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy is a series of tests focused on basic skills that are administered annually to Australian students.

16

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

attention to sustainability factors mentioned by Reaburn and McDonald (2017) and Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018), and, reflection on the research presented in the following chapters should contribute to considerations around CoP sustainability.

Evolving Social Learning Theory Earlier in this chapter, we articulated the evolution of Communities of Practice and it is no surprise, given the focus on learning, that CoP theory and practice is continuing to evolve. It has moved from describing organic communities, emerging in a single practice field (Wenger 1998) to approaches on how to create intentional and strategic communities, to viewing an individual’s membership in, not only a single practice field community, but as membership and knowledgeability across a whole landscape of practice (Wenger-Trayner et al., 2014). Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner are expanding the concept of social learning spaces, which include, but are not only located in, Communities of Practice.

Social Learning Spaces In the book Learning to Make a Difference: Volume I Value creation in social learning spaces Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) expand the concept of a social learning space, which may include some of the features of a Community of Practice, but without the expectations of continuity and ongoing commitment. The features they highlight are: • • • • •

The focus is on people and their participation Members drive the learning agenda Learning is rooted in mutual engagement The engagement pushes the participants’ edge of learning Meaning and identity remain central but based on caring to make a difference rather than competence in a social practice.

Examples of social learning they present involve all kinds of interactions, such as a productive conversation, sharing practice, success, failures and tips with colleagues, a peer review, then shared reflection on that teaching practice, and working together on research or resources. However, the type of social learning space we are considering in Chapter 4 is a more formal type of social learning space that more specifically adopts the five features outlined above. Social learning spaces are not limited to colocated, shared geographical spaces, as they also include distributed networks such as those in Chapter 5 and online CoPs, such as the online communities presented in Chapter 4.

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

17

Wenger-Trayner, Wenger-Trayner, Cameron, Eryigit-Madzwamuse, and Hart (2019) say that social learning spaces retain some of the fundamental characteristics of social learning often associated with Communities of Practice, such as the focus on people and their participation, members driving the learning agenda, and that learning is rooted in mutual engagement, which pushes the participants’ edge of learning. Also, meaning and identity remain central, but based on caring to make a difference rather than competence in a social practice. Both CoPs and social learning spaces are focused on learning, however, while some social learning spaces may not be about a specific domain of practice, others such as the online communities described in Chapter 4 have particular domains based around a hashtag. These chat groups can have a broad focus such as #Aussie Ed or #WhatisSchool that are the focus of Chapter 4 or a more specific focus such as #primarySTEMchat or #includeEdau.

Conclusion This chapter has reviewed the theoretical foundation and then the evolution of the concept of a Community of Practice to provide you, the reader, with a theoretical framework as you peruse the following chapters that research the variety of ways that CoPs can be established and sustained within an educational context. Although brief, the key foundational ideas, the Value Creation Framework and an overview of evolving practice should be enough for readers ready to move onto the following research and application chapters; while references provide links for readers wishing to further explore Social Learning and Community of Practice theory and practice. Enjoy the learning journey, starting with Chapter 2—“The value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers” which explores the CoP experience of ECTs in an Australian secondary school, where their community, domain and practice are focused on social and professional learning with and from each other, and wider community members.

Key Takeaways • Communities of Practice and Social Learning Spaces have a solid theoretical foundation, which continues to evolve • There are different types and stages of Communities of Practice so consider where your CoP is located and what learning is appropriate to inform your practice • The Value Creation Framework provides a framework for visioning and evaluating CoPs • Facilitation (leadership) skills and commitment to meeting CoP members’ professional development needs, and informal relationship building, are important success factors.

18

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

References Bastow Institute of Educational Leadership. (2019). Communities of practice. Accessed 21 June 2020. https://www.bastow.vic.edu.au/leadership-initiatives/communities-of-practice. Biesta, G., Tedder, M., & Biesta, P. (2006). How is agency possible? Towards an ecological understanding of agency-as-achievement. Learning, Life and Agency in the Life Course. Retrieved from www.tlrp.org. Cole, M., & Scribner, S. (1974). Culture & thought: A psychological introduction. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Daniels, H. (2008). Vygotsky and research. New York and London: Routledge. Gallimore, R., Goldenberg, C. N., & Weisner, T. S. (1993). The social construction and subjective reality of activity settings: Implications for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 21(4), 537–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00942159. Heidegger, M. (1978). Basic writings. London: Routledge. John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Educational Psychologist, 31(3–4), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00461520.1996.9653266. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboe, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. London: Springer. Kuusisaari, H. (2014). Teachers at the zone of proximal development–Collaboration promoting or hindering the development process. Teaching and Teacher Education, 43, 46–57. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tate.2014.06.001. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimated peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Lieberman, A., Campbell, C., & Yashkina, A. (2016). Teacher learning and leadership: Of, by, and for teachers. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/lib/USQ/ detail.action?docID=465895. McDonald, J. (2014). Community, domain, practice: Facilitator catchcry for revitalizing learning and teaching through Communities of Practice. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resourcecommunity-domain-pr. McDonald, J., Burch, T., Nagy, J., Star, C., Cox, M. D., Collins, E., & Margetts, F. (2012). Identifying, building and sustaining leadership capacity for Communities of Practice in higher education. Final report. Australian Government Office for learning and teaching. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. Sydney, NSW, Australia. McDonald, J., & Star, C. (2006). Designing the future of learning through a community of practice of teachers of first year courses at an Australian university. Paper presented at the The First International LAMS Conference: Designing the Future of Learning, Sydney, NSW, Australia. McDonald, J., Collins, P., Hingst, R., Kimmins, L., Lynch, B., & Star, C. (2008, July). Community learning: Members’ stories about their academic community of practice. In Engaging Communities, Proceedings of the 31st HERDSA Annual Conference, Rotorua, 1–4, pp. 221–229. Mercieca, B. (2017). What is a Community of Practice? In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice: Facilitating social learning in higher education (Vol. 1, pp. 3–26). Singapore: Springer. Mercieca, B. (2018). Companions on the journey: An exploration of the value of Communities of Practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia (Doctor of Philosophy), University of Southern Queensland, Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/ 34618/. Mercieca, B., & Kelly, N. (2018). Early career teacher peer support through private groups in social media. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1359866X.2017.1312282. Nelson, E. (2015). Effective learning is not a mirage. Teachers’ Voice. Retrieved from https://www. teachingchannel.org/blog/2015/09/18/effective-pd-is-not-a-mirage/.

1 What Is a Community of Practice?

19

Pedersen, K. W., Brown, D., & Nash, K. (2017). Delivering institutional priorities in learning and teaching through a social learning model: Embedding a high impact Community of Practice initiative at the University of Tasmania. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice: Facilitating social learning in higher education (Vol. 1, pp. 99–120). Singapore: Springer. Pignatelli, F. (1993). What can I do? Foucault on freedom and the question of teacher agency. Educational Theory, 43(4), 411–432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.1993.00411.x. Priestley, M., Edwards, R., Priestley, A., & Miller, K. (2012). Teacher agency in curriculum making: Agents of change and spaces for manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 191–214. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00588.x. Reaburn, P., & McDonald, J. (2017). Creating and facilitating Communities of Practice in higher education: Theory to practice in a regional Australian University. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice—Facilitating social learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer. Tight, M. (2015). Theory application in higher education research: The case of Communities of Practice. European Journal of Higher Education, 5(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/215 68235.2014.997266. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The development of higher forms of attention in childhood. In V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 189–240). Armonk, NY: Sharpe. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Cambridge MA: Harvard Business School Press. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & de Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/resour ces/publications/evaluation-framework/. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2014). The Value Creation Framework (VCF). Strategic evaluation of network activities. Accessed 21 June 2020. https://wengertrayner.com/resources/ publications/strategic-evaluation-of-network-activities. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2017). Communities of Practice go to university. In J. McDonald & A. E. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of Practice: Facilitating social learning in higher education (Vol. 1, pp. v–viii). Singapore: Springer. Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of Practice: A handbook. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/ https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-pra ctice. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2020). Learning to make a difference (Vol. 1: Value creation in social learning spaces). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wenger-Trayner, B., Wenger-Trayner, E., Cameron, J., Eryigit-Madzwamuse, S., & Hart, A. (2019). Boundaries and boundary objects: An evaluation framework for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 321–338. Wenger-Trayner, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Hutchinson, S., Kubiak, C., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2014). Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning. Abingdon, UK: Taylor and Francis. Wertsch, J. V. (2009). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wilson, I. (2019). What it means to establish a community of practice (CoP). Victorian Department of Education and Training. Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Accessed 21 June 2020. https://www.edu cation.vic.gov.au/school/teachers/classrooms/Pages/approachesppn17cop.aspx.

Chapter 2

The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers Jacquelin McDonald and Bernadette Mary Mercieca

Abstract The importance of retaining early career teachers through supportive measures such as Communities of Practice is an international challenge that has been extensively documented. This chapter, drawing on a longitudinal study of a regional secondary school in Victoria, Australia, considers the value a group of early career teachers gained from belonging to two different Communities of Practice over a three-year period. Their stories suggest belonging to these collaborative communities allowed them to thrive in their teaching practice as they participated in learning loops, taking ideas, and strategies gained from the Communities of Practice to the classroom and then back again to the community for further feedback and support. As well, the Communities of Practice scaffolded their application for leadership positions later in their career. Analysis highlights the importance of Communities of Practice particularly in rural communities, for supporting the professional learning of early career teachers where professional learning opportunities can be limited. Keywords Early career teacher · Community of practice · Learning loops · Rural education · Identity · Leadership

Introduction Yes, I was a bit lost. Didn’t know where to go. But by the end of the year I was very, very confident. I am very confident in my role now, being able to push further. (Participant 4)

The value of Communities of Practice (CoPs), as outlined in Chapter 1: What are Communities of Practice will now be considered in the context of contemporary practice in schools internationally, including consideration of how this approach can inform Initial Teacher Education (ITE) programmes. There are a variety of names for different forms of collaborative endeavour—such as Personal Learning Communities (PLCs) (Department of Education, Victoria) or Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) or Faculty Learning Communities (FLCs), Social Learning Spaces (SLLs), Collegial Support Networks—and, of course, Communities of Practice. While many schools are attempting to move towards more collaborative forms of professional development for their teachers, the number of those who have successfully taken up the challenge of developing them in a sustained and informed way is still far from © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_2

21

22

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

universal (Fullan & Quinn, 2016; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012). At the same time, the ineffectiveness of traditional forms of professional development has been well documented in academic literature (Fullan, 2007; Holmes, Preston, Shaw, & Buchanan, 2013; Lieberman, Campbell, & Yashkina, 2016; Oddone, Hughes, & Lupton, 2019). While millions, even billions of dollars have been spent by schools and government organisations on these forms of teacher professional development, there is growing evidence of them having little effect on system-wide improvement with, “a continuing disparity between what is known to be effective, and what teachers experience” (Oddone et al., 2019, p. 3). That is not to say that external professional development events such as conferences and seminars lack value—in fact, they can be good sources of inspiration for teachers and opportunities for them to network with teachers from other schools—but unless those who participate have a collaborative learning loop that allows them to take these ideas and strategies back to their colleagues and adapt them to their local contexts and their student cohort, such experiences will continue to have limited impact. As Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) state, the most important thing is “what people do with those goodies after they go back to their practice” (p. 44). This chapter will explore the value of Communities of Practice (CoPs) evidenced through a constructivist grounded theory research approach with Early Career Teachers (ECTs) located in an Australian rural secondary school. The research findings articulate the value of CoPs in creating a supportive environment where ECTs thrived, demonstrating agency in developing their professional careers and personal social learning communities. A review of the value of CoPs is followed by an exploration of opportunities and issues facing ECTs located in rural contexts, including how this creates potential leadership opportunities. The research context, methodology and findings, based on interviews with five ECTs are presented to illustrate what the research revealed about the value of CoPs for them. As discussed in Chapter 1, the idea of Communities of Practice goes back to the seminal work of Lave and Wenger (1991), who describe a process known as situated learning whereby people learn through the work environment in which they are situated and the relationships they developed with those around them. Based on an apprenticeship model, they describe the learning trajectory of a novice (for example, an ECT) to an expert practitioner, who is situated in, and supported by, the whole practitioner community. The novice (ECT) has the opportunity to learn from more experienced members of the CoP who possess what has become known as tacit knowledge—that rich depth of untapped knowledge that resides in organisations such as schools (Kemmis et al., 2014; Sternberg & Horvath, 1999). Tacit knowledge is unquantifiable but what is known is that it develops through years of experience. As such, ECTs have much to gain when they can tap into these deep wells of wisdom from the more experienced members within their CoP, while the more experienced members can benefit from both articulating their ideas and supporting the less experienced members of the group. In turn, the ECTs have the opportunity to share their enthusiasm and new ideas and thinking that they might have learnt in the ITE programmes, or gleaned from social media groups they may be involved

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

23

in, knowing that their ideas will be valued by the other experienced teachers in the trusted environment that a CoP provides. In terms of school-based professional development, which is often provided at the beginning of the school year or semester, Calvert (2016) highlights the importance of teacher agency that is lacking when this is orchestrated by administrators, provided by external providers and involves little or no follow-up. As the famous Herman Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve shows, within a day 75% of new material is forgotten unless it is reinforced, in this context through ongoing reflection within a CoP (Murdock, 1985). A lack of autonomy and “demolition of agency” is also highlighted by Frost and Durrant (2002) in terms of the top-down reforms that are imposed on teachers in the UK and other countries (p. 144). They advocate for a “re-professionalisation of the teaching community” where teachers are actively involved in inquiry rather than just passively implementing sets of practices or research designed by other so-called experts (p. 144). Frost and Durrant (2002) even critique action research that has become a popular activity for teachers, considering it as somewhat individualistic rather than collaborative. Further, Knight (2019), coming from a coaching perspective, stresses that when teachers are given autonomy with real choices then “real student growth is possible” (p. 6). Drawing all this together, Desimone and Garet (2015) maintain that in order for professional development to be effective it needs to have the following features: (i) content-focused activities centred on subject matter content and how students learn; (ii) active learning that gives teachers opportunities to observe, receive feedback, analyse student work or make presentations as opposed to sitting passively in a lecture theatre; (iii) coherence: content, goals and activities are consistent with the school curriculum and goals, teachers’ knowledge and beliefs; (iv) sustained duration—over the whole school year, as opposed to one-off events; and (v) collective participation—groups of teachers from the same grade, subject or school (p. 253). Clearly, traditional forms of professional development and the relatively passive strategies from earlier decades would struggle to address most, if not all, of these criteria.

The Value Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers The importance of retaining early career teachers through supportive measures such as Communities of Practice is an international challenge that has been extensively documented (Burke, Aubusson, Schuck, Buchanan, & Prescott, 2015; Lindqvist, Nordänger, & Carlsson, 2014; Ovenden-Hope, Blandford, Cain, & Maxwell, 2018). The Initial Teacher Data Report 2019 [Australian Institute of School Leadership (AITSL), 2019] based on a stakeholders’ survey of early career teachers in regarding their career intentions, found that only 56% were sure about staying in the profession. Burke et al. (2015) highlight the isolation that many beginning teachers feel, their research with ECTs located in New South Wales revealing that what they craved

24

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

most was the expertise and collegial support of more experienced colleagues. All teachers, but particularly ECTs benefit from the support of a Community of Practice to reflect on their teaching strategies and techniques and make connections with other staff members (McCluskey, Sim, & Johnson, 2011). Knight (2019) highlights the complexity of teaching and the adaptability that it requires on the part of the teacher, “meaning that discretion and personal discovery are essential to success, and that onesize-fits-all solutions or external dictates will only hamstring progress.” In addition, ECTs have the opportunity to develop their professional identity in learning how to navigate their professional responsibilities (Willis, Crosswell, Morrison, Gibson, & Ryan, 2017) and “be supported with their professional understandings about the role and ‘work’ of a teacher” (Mantei & Kervin, 2011, p. 2). This is particularly important in light of the compulsory professional standards they must achieve in many countries in their first few years of teaching (United Kingdom Government, 2013; Victorian Institute of Teaching, 2020). Evans, Waring, and Christodoulou (2017) also note the importance of advancing the professional learning of ECTs by giving them “a greater sense of agency within their schools” (p. 411). The value of this greater sense of agency will be seen later in this chapter in the way the ECTs in this study took on leadership roles within the first three years of their teaching careers, knowing they were supported by the CoPs they belonged to. Further, a recent report by Heffernan, Longmuir, Bright, and Misol (2019) of 2444 practising teachers in Australia found that issues of heavy workload and the health, well-being and safety of teachers were serious concerns. For ECTs, especially in their first year of teaching, the workload is immense and having to deal with these issues without the type of support we are advocating, such as CoPs, it is not surprising that many consider leaving (AITSL, 2019; Fox, Wilson, & Deaney, 2011). Social connection and a welcoming culture is also particularly important for teachers in rural or remote schools who are often away from family, friends and professional colleagues (Mercieca & Kelly, 2018) or international students who have studied locally but for whom English is not their first language, who might otherwise feel excluded (McCluskey et al., 2011). In fact, Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) would go so far as to say that the key difference between those ECTs who have good beginnings and choose to remain in a school and those who do not, is the school’s culture and the level of support they receive. Building on this understanding of a culture of learning and growth, Fullan and Quinn (2016) envisage a school that is clear about its focus, fosters the development of collaborative interactions, has a deep understanding of learning and ensures there is a culture of both internal and external accountability. In a similar way, Netolicky’s (2020) study of a secondary school in Western Australia emphasises the importance of context in terms of shaping the professional identity of all teachers, but particularly beginning teachers: “A sense of belonging and self-authenticity was important” (p. 20). The importance of CoPs to sustain the professional growth of ECTs over a number of years and to ultimately scaffold their transition to leadership roles is a particular focus of this chapter. Within the context of a rural setting too, in which this part of the research is set, come particular issues which further highlight the significance of CoPs for ECTs: (i) the social and professional challenges of teaching in a rural

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

25

or remote setting, particularly for ECTs coming from metropolitan centres, and (ii) the rapid climb of many ECTs to positions of leadership that they might not access in metropolitan schools till much later in their career. Each of these issues will be discussed in turn.

The Tyranny of Distance: Locating Self Within a Vast Landscape of Practice Physical distances in Australia are huge, with many rural and remote schools located hours of travel away from the nearest large regional town and more to capital cities. Rural schools have difficulty recruiting and retaining teachers so financial incentives are starting to be offered by governments for ECTs to teach in these areas where they are expected to “serve their time” in these “less desirable” schools until they are able to compete with more experienced teachers for city placements (Kelly & Fogarty, 2015). Further research would also indicate that rural teachers are more transient than their city peers (McKenzie, Kos, Walker, Hong, & Owen, 2014), although this could at least be partially due to the fact that there are many short-term/contract placements in rural areas (Downes & Roberts, 2018). Pegg and Panizzon (2011) found in their study of secondary Mathematics teachers in rural schools in Australia that many cited the issue of the “tyranny of distance” when professional development opportunities were generally offered in metropolitan centres, particularly when it was a “longitudinal professional development, given the time required to travel and attend these sessions, and the difficulty in having teaching responsibilities covered during absences from their school” (p. 150). This highlights the importance of CoPs particularly in rural contexts in that longitudinal professional development can be accessed on site without the need to travel or leave classes unattended. A CoP can provide teachers with the collaborative space to work with developed materials and adapt them to their local context or do their own research within their particular context. Alternatively, one teacher can attend an outside programme/conference, receive expert training or be part of an online social media community, such as Twitter, and then work with their CoP to share their learning. They can act as brokers “carry[ing] learning from one place to another” (Wenger, 2009, p. 7). In this way the two professional learning contexts are linked and the sense of isolation that rural teachers might feel can be reduced. As Kelly and Fogarty (2015) note, supportive professional networks alongside sustained induction processes go a long way towards encouraging beginning teachers to stay in their new rural home. This will be illustrated in the examples we share later in this chapter, where most of the ECTs who were part of the original PhD1 study are still happily immersed in the school three years later. The 1 The doctoral study is entitled, Companions on the journey: an exploration of the value of commu-

nities of practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia. It involved research with early career teachers in Australia and New Zealand in 2016 in regard to their participation in Communities of Practice, including those in social media.

26

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

research was conducted on two occasions at a regional secondary school in Victoria, Australia—as part of one author’s (Mercieca) doctrinal research and three years later as a joint study by both authors—providing a longitudinal perspective on the ECTs who participated in both parts of the research. Research also indicates that ECTs beginning their professional careers in rural locations face particular personal challenges compared with their metropolitan counterparts including social and professional isolation (DeVore-Wedding, 2017; Pegg & Panizzon, 2011), having to teach out-of-field subjects (Lazarus, 2003; Weldon, 2016) fitting in with their new community (Downes & Roberts, 2018), and a lack of social privacy, where their professional and personal lives can be exposed to public scrutiny in a way that would be significantly less likely to occur in a metropolitan context (Willis et al., 2017). Issues of educational disadvantage and the limited school resources and technology in some rural schools can also put additional pressures on ECTs (Malloy & Allen, 2007). Within rural US schools, Malloy and Allen (2007) also found that “nurturing the nurturers” was the most important step in overcoming these additional pressures and enhancing teacher retention (p. 19). This can be achieved by ensuring that ECTs have the opportunity to belong to a collaborative community such as a Community of Practice, as well as having adequate mentoring (Tonna Michelle, Bjerkolt, & Holland, 2017) and induction procedures (Harmsen, Helms-Lorenz, Maulana, & van Veen, 2018).

Early Career Teacher Identity in a Rural or Remote Context From a different perspective, Morrison (2013) highlights the crucial importance of identity formation for all ECTs through interpersonal relationships with their colleagues, but particularly those who move to rural contexts where they are isolated from their normal contexts as has just been highlighted. Wenger (1998) speaks of identity as negotiated experience that has the opportunity to develop within a CoP where, “we define who we are by the ways we experience ourselves through participation” (p. 145). Participation is particularly important in terms of ECTs having a place where they can articulate their ideas to their peers and build their professional profile within the CoP without fear of censure. The importance of identity also aligns with the findings of Netolicky (2016) who, having reviewed a range of research evidence related to cognitive coaching, concludes that identity-shaping experiences can have “positive, unexpected, non-linear impacts on and beyond individuals” (p. 81). For rural ECTs an identity, not only as a teacher, but as a teacher within a rural community has particular implications. Walker-Gibbs, Ludecke, and Kline (2018) speak of a “Pedagogy of the Rural” in terms of what the rural brings to teachers’ identity (p. 302). Their case studies of three beginning teachers and their principals in two rural Victorian schools in Australia, found that ECTs in such rural contexts enter into a liminal space where their identities undergo “formation and transformation” (p. 301). They begin to let go of unrealistic stereotypes, both positive and negative, about what rural life is like and with appropriate support, can gradually come to a

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

27

stronger sense of self, with greater knowledge and agency. This will become more evident in the ECTs in this study who made choices to remain in their regional community and in some cases, committed to marital relationships.

Early Career Teacher Leadership Opportunities in Rural or Remote Contexts The second issue is a more nuanced one. Many ECTs are delighted to be able to take on leadership in their school in their second or third year of teaching in a rural or remote school, finding it energising and an affirmation of their professional identity, as will be seen in the data (Mercieca, 2018). Research conducted by Cherkowski and Schnellert’s (2017) in rural Canadian secondary schools showed that the formative experiences of being part of a CoP—such as engaging in inquiry projects where they needed to co-opt other teachers in the school to assist them—provided an entry point to leadership for these young teachers. They point to the personal growth that developed for them over their one to two years in the CoP, “that led to the increased confidence needed for many of them to emerge as leaders co-constructing organizational structures designed to improve student learning” (p. 18). Butler, Schnellert, and MacNeil (2015) make a similar point in their study of teachers who engaged in collaborative enquiry with the majority experiencing heightened self-efficacy and empowerment to be more involved in overall school and district change and involvement. These are examples of CoPs scaffolding leadership for ECTs that are central to the research which will be discussed in this chapter. However, there are also particular issues with ECTs taking on these roles so early in their professional lives. Graham, Miller, and Paterson (2009) point to the tensions that can occur when ECTs move into middle leadership roles while still having considerable classroom responsibilities. This can be problematic at a time when they are still trying to establish classroom routines and master the content they are teaching, particularly if this involves senior classes. There can also be tensions in ostensibly moving up the hierarchy away from peers given the importance of establishing social connections in a new rural environment (Huggins, Lesseig, & Rhodes, 2017). Primary ECTs, in particular, who move rapidly to the position of principal or assistant principal can find themselves not only isolated from their peers but overwhelmed with the heavy responsibilities that come with these roles, the “cost” of leadership potentially impinging on social and family life (Miller, Graham, & Paterson, 2006, p. 34). Within the context of these considerations of ECTs in rural communities, our attention now turns to the data from this study which used a longitudinal study to explore the value of Communities of Practice in a particular school environment. The data includes interviews that were undertaken in 2016 as part of one of the author’s doctoral studies and in 2019 with both authors.

28 Table 2.1 Demographic details for rural college participants (n = 5)

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca Participant

Age

Years of teaching

Teaching domain

1

26–30

4

Humanities

2

26–30

4

Humanities

3

26–30

4

Science

4

26–30

4

Humanities

5

26–30

4

Humanities

The Research Context The school from which data is drawn (henceforth, known as Rural College2 ) is a coeducational secondary Catholic school in regional Victoria. It had a 2020 enrolment of 1100 students and a teaching staff of over 100 teachers. Its Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage (ICSEA)3 value is 1030 relative to an average value of 1030 (MySchool, 2020). It is a non-selective school, catering to a wide range of student abilities. Two key professional learning ventures were implemented at Rural College in the period from 2015 to 2019. This included a coaching programme known as Coaching Group (MacGillivray, 2009)4 and Professional Learning Teams (PLTs). The Coaching Group (CG) programme involved having one of each teacher’s classes surveyed once or twice a year, and the results of this being fed back to their coach and then shared within a small group. These CG groups consisted of groups of no more than four teachers and their coach who met on a semi-regular basis to reflect on the data from each teacher’s class. All staff were required to belong to these groups and the coaches were teachers from middle management who were trained in the process. However, by the time of the 2019 research in this study, the CG programme had been abandoned because the staff found its process too cumbersome and the focus was more on the PLTs. The PLTs involved teachers having the chance to nominate areas of interest and then other teachers signing up to meet with them on a regular basis. Up to ten teachers were involved in each PLT and, again, all teachers were required to be involved in this venture. These groups regularly met every fortnight over the course of a year. Details of the early career teachers from Rural College who participated in one of the researcher’s doctoral research in 2016 (Mercieca, 2018) and agreed to participate in 2019 are provided in Table 2.1. Each participant has been given a number 1–5 to protect their anonymity (P1–P5).

2 Rural

College is a pseudonym to protect the privacy of the school. Index of Community Socio-educational Advantage (ICSEA) is a scale of socio-educational advantage that is computed for each school in Australia. For more details see https://www.mys chool.edu.au/media/1820/guide-to-understanding-icsea-values.pdf. 4 Coaching Group is a pseudonym to protect the privacy of this business. 3 The

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

29

Methodology Both researchers travelled to Rural College and spent two days on site interviewing the principal, the professional learning coordinator (himself an early career teacher) and four of the other early career teachers who had been interviewed in one of the researcher’s doctoral research three years earlier. Spending two days in the school allowed the researchers to experience the school environment more intimately than if the interviews had been conducted remotely (Holloway & Wheeler, 2002). Semistructured interviews were used. As outlined in Chapter 1, the interview questions were generated to reflect the phases of the Wenger-Trayner, Wenger-Trayner, FentonO’Creevy, Hutchinson, and Kubiak (2014) Value Creation Framework to explore the activities or learning happening at each phase, and what conditions enabled these to be achieved. The decision to use interviews rather than other methods was made from a pragmatic point of view as all could be conducted over a two-day timespan and enabled in-depth exploration of value creation stories and follow-up probe questions about ECT experiences and issues. The interviews ranged in time from 25 to 50 min and were conducted at mutually agreeable times for the teachers involved. Guba and Lincoln (2013) point to the values of the researcher as the prime instrument in qualitative data collection. The fact that one of the researchers had previously met each of the participants three years earlier meant that there was a degree of relational continuity in research (Clandinin, 2007) present, with both the interviewers and interviewees feeling comfortable with each other in what Rubin (2005) would describe as “responsive interviewing” (p. 12). The interviews were recorded electronically and then transcribed by one of the researchers. A constructivist grounded theory approach, which seeks to generate theory, not verify an existing theory (Charmaz, 2001; Glaser & Strauss, 2006) was used to analyse the data from this study because it appeared to suit the particular educational research context. The researchers were keen to explore the value of CoPs in supporting and sustaining ECTs, as retention of ECTs is an international concern, and requires further research. The grounded theory approach enabled participants to tell the story of their career journey, and the findings to emerge from the data and not influenced by the researchers’ preconceived ideas. Theory about the value of CoPs for the retention and progression of ECTs was generated from the data. Grounded theory is a way of conducting qualitative analysis that considers the complexity of the human person (Charmaz, 2001). It is a popular mode of analysis that works with codes that arise from the data, which is “grounded” in the data, rather than being imposed on the data, as “conceptual tools” (Charmaz, 2001, p. 165). The approach involves moving back and forth between the data and the codes in an iterative process. Originally arising from the seminal work of Glaser and Strauss (1967), grounded theory has become a popular qualitative tool for researchers. Fundamentally, it involves a systematic way of working with data in a process which includes three main steps: • Coding: During the coding process, it is important that the researcher is open to many conceptual possibilities (Watling & Lingard, 2012). Data was analysed line by line, coding common themes as they emerged from the data.

30

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

• Constant comparisons: as different scripts are coded, codes are compared and emerging characteristics are noted (Charmaz, 2001). Counterexamples that do not fit with these codes are noted. • Common codes/gerunds/sensitising concepts are formed that allow the researcher to continue to reflect on their data as they begin to write about the data. The two researchers identified common codes that emerged from their individual analyses of the data. Lather (1986) speaks of a “reciprocal relationship” between data where data is used to “generate propositions in a dialectic manner that permits use of a priori frameworks, but which keeps a particular framework from becoming the container into which the data must be poured” (p. 26). The data in this study was manually coded using the grounded theory approach by each researcher separately and then codes were compared following the constructivist grounded theory approach. The two researchers separately coded the interview transcripts line by line, analysing the responses, identifying the codes which were “grounded” in the data, while being open to many conceptual possibilities (Watling & Lingard, 2012). Their findings were recorded on an “initial comparison of codes (sensitising concepts) for early career teacher participants” table. An example of the coding findings is presented in Table 2.2. The findings were then shared, compared and discussed via Skype. This was the constant comparison step, as different scripts were coded, codes were compared and emerging characteristics noted (Charmaz, 2001) These comparisons either confirmed individual coding or triggered renewed exploration of interview data to verify and rethink the existing coding. On reaching agreement on the common codes, the researchers continued to reflect on their data, while writing about the data that is presented in the research findings below.

Research Findings The two key findings that emerged from the data was that participation in the Communities of Practice created a sense of engaged belonging for the ECTs, leading to career persistence, sustainability of the teaching role and stability within the rural context. Participation also created a culture that encouraged ECTs to have the agency to take the leadership opportunities, which also enhanced career persistence and commitment to their rural location. Key themes that emerged from data analysis and coding were: the importance of the supportive community; unexpected positive experience of teaching in the rural location; opportunity to learn new skills and share teaching strategies; a growth culture that fostered a sense of agency; and scaffolding of leadership skills and opportunities for permanent positions and rapid career progression. These findings are articulated in the following sections. The data from this study built on the findings of one of the authors in her doctoral study (Mercieca, 2018). In this earlier study, it became clear that Rural College

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

31

Table 2.2 An example of initial comparison of codes (sensitising concepts) for early career teacher participants Code

Description

Community Sustainability Rural Types of CoP

Creating positive context Community (P3) in rural positions Changed structure × 2 comments (P3) Steep learning curve member since 2016 (P1) Lots of opportunity to be involved in communities (P2) Started on 6-month casual contract, now permanent, stayed longer than intended. Valued supportive community and student (P1)

Leadership Context creating Enabling value leadership opportunity Feeling supported and empowered Boundary crossing

Examples

Leadership position in 2019 AS PLT enabled cross-discipline relationships (P1) College has been very supportive in allowing young staff members to push up already. Because I know of another staff member whose same age as me, 6 months older than who is a POL 4 now (P4) Allowed to become part of the higher leadership of the school (P4)

Key words Supportive community Opportunities Staff retention Rural posting Sustainability for interviewees

Leadership, opportunity Empowerment Career progression Job satisfaction boundary crossing

compared favourably with many other schools in that it was a school that particularly focused on fostering a culture of learning and growth (Fullan & Quinn, 2016). It enabled the Early Career Teachers (ECTs) who began there in 2016 to build their self-efficacy, professional identity and social connection from the support they received. This support included an extended induction over most of their first year, a purposively appointed mentor and involvement into two Communities of Practice—a coaching group (CG) and a Professional Learning Team (PLT). Findings articulated in the doctoral study (Mercieca, 2018) noted that the ECTs experienced immediate value and saw the potential value of participation in the two CoPs, the first two phases of the Value Creation Framework of Wenger, Trayner, and de Laat (2011) as described in Chapter 1. As one ECT at the time indicated, there was immediate value in finding a CoP that was relevant to his teaching needs: I’ve found the PLT really good because it was actually proactive in what you were interested in and you directed where it was going. And I thought that was better support because the

32

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca people you were with were actually interested in the same topic as you. (Mercieca 2018, p. 133)

Another ECT found the CoPs were helpful in getting them to take time to think about their practice: “Yes, it’s amazing the amount of reflection that’s still with you and makes you think still think about, Ok, what I am doing. I can change and reflect on it” (Mercieca, 2018, p. 137). Potential value for the ECTs at this time was that they could share the struggles they were having in the classroom and receive constructive feedback about what they could do to address the issue. As one of them commented: You can feel comfortable saying anything about what your successes were, what didn’t work, because you’re going to get that support. “Have you tried doing it this way?” … And you don’t feel judged or if you’re not successful with something. I think it’s super supportive. (Mercieca, 2018, p. 142)

The culture of growth that was evident in the school and particularly supported these teachers in their first year of teachers was expressed by one of the ECTs, “You see that it’s a nurturing environment that is there for everyone. No-one’s left on their own. Any support you need is there” (Mercieca, 2018, p. 142). The next section will explore how the Community of Practice supported the social and professional lives of the Early Career Teachers in the three years following the PhD research. Findings will be discussed drawing on the evolving work of WengerTrayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020).

Three Years on—The Early Career Journey Within Communities of Practice Fast forward three years to 2019 and against the usual trend of rapid turnover of teachers in rural schools of—as many as one in five (Plunkett & Dyson, 2011)—of the seven ECTs at the school in 2016, five are still teaching there. As noted previously by Mercieca (2018), Rural College fostered a culture of growth (Fullan & Quinn, 2016) that supported the Early Career Teachers. This support included an extended induction, a purposively appointed mentor and involvement in two Communities of Practice—a CG group and a Professional Learning Team (PLT).

Thriving in a Supportive Environment As previously noted, one of the reasons for high turnover of rural ECTs is that on completing their degree, they take the only teaching positions available to them— casual, short-term, and often rural, contracts. Several of the ECTs in this study were initially employed on casual contracts but had stayed and developed their professional career. P4 for example started on a six-month casual contract part way into the first

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

33

semester of 2016 but now, three years later, he had a permanent position. He reflected that he has stayed longer than he intended primarily because of the permanent position he attained but also because he valued the supportive community and the friendly students. He also noted that many of the other ECTs have also stayed on at the school and they have become a close group of friends, socialising outside of school as well as professionally within the school environment. As evident in the literature, strong social connections are particularly important for teachers in rural or remote schools who are often away from family, friends, and professional colleagues (Mercieca & Kelly, 2018). Each of the ECTs were asked about their level of involvement in the PLT and the Communities of Practice over the three years between 2016 and 2019, and the personal value or issues around belonging to these communities. All valued the opportunity to be involved collaboratively, with the CoP membership fostering the building of supportive networks and the professional confidence to step up to leadership roles earlier than expected in their teaching careers. P1 valued the different support strategies, such as the CG group, and noted that, while the other staff such as his mentor or those in his staff office were supportive as needed for unplanned issues, CG groups provided a dedicated time and space for theoretical discussion, and not just the casual, just-in-time support from a chance encounter in the staff room. He also stated that involvement in the PLTs enabled cross-discipline relationships in that, as a Humanities teacher he could learn from Science and English teachers in ways that would not be possible in normal faculty meetings. P2 and P3 said the supportive community in their PLTs gave them confidence to take on leadership roles in various curriculum domains in 2019. Similarly, P4 found that the best benefit of the CoPs was that he developed the confidence to put his hand up for a leadership position that allowed him to be part of the higher leadership of the school. This reflects the findings of Cherkowski and Schnellert (2017) that a supportive environment can scaffold leadership for ECTs. Rural College also demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting ECTs through mentoring. One participant provided an example of this high level of support, noting meeting with the mentor “a fair bit.” P4 also valued the support of his mentor: “He was very supportive of me. Very good. Really good. So, the CG honestly did (support me). Because it was just me and my mentor and a few other teachers.” Our findings indicate the value of the importance that Rural College put on intentionally choosing mentors that would best suit beginning teachers rather than just randomly assigning them, which contributed to the well-being of the ECTs. This is a sign of the culture of growth of the school (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012), and a significant contribution what the data indicated was a supportive community. Throughout the year the mentors also accompanied their mentees to the beginning teachers Induction meetings facilitated by the Professional Learning leader. These induction meetings were beneficial in terms of ECTs networking with other mentors and being aware of the particular issues such as reporting or parent–teacher nights that the mentees might be focusing on. From the point of view of the ECTs, the fact that their principal also attended the Induction meetings from time to time and participated as a normal member meant that they felt important. This is part of Fullan and Quinn’s (2016)

34

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

understanding of “coherence” where leaders model learning by learning themselves, adding “impact and prestige” to the gathering and allowing staff to see that the principal is learning just as much as they are (McDonald, 2014, p. 27). These strong connections fostered within the CoPs added value to the professional learning of the ECTs, as well as creating a context where they felt welcomed and supported in their transition into a rural community. As P2 noted, “I do like the country life and I think it would have been a lot harder if I felt I did not fit in with the school.” Interestingly, as Willis et al. (2017) notes, it is not necessarily easy fitting into a rural community, far away from your family and friends and where your privacy can be compromised. Compared to a teaching position in a large city, rural-based ECTs are highly visible to other school staff, parents and students as they may often meet up in local shops, sporting and community activities. However, these ECTs appear to have supported each other as well as being supported by the school, as P4 reflects, “Oh, we are all socially a group of friends. So, we would draw on each other as well. We have similar shared experiences” (P4). This aligns with the “nurturing the nurturers” referred to by Malloy and Allen (2007). In this study, these social connections even resulted in the marriage of two of the ECTs.

Learning New Skills and Strategies Participants were asked how their teaching practice had developed over the past three years as a result of belonging to the CoPs and any examples of benefits for students. As an example, P3, felt that belonging to the CG groups in her first years of teaching helped her to differentiate the classrooms she taught in: And it certainly helped me in the way that I set the class up and I know then to have the routine to go and check in on him [a weaker student] and make sure he understood what I said and if I need to break it down further and just help get him on task. And then I go back to the rest of the class.

The CoPs provided a safe context for P3 to identify issues in her classrooms, get advice, try out strategies in the following week/s then give and receive feedback in what Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) call a learning loop. ECTs could experiment with different teaching strategies, share their successes and failures within their CoP and then try again, knowing that each time they have a safe community space to return to, for further feedback and support. We suggest this is a far more effective way of learning new strategies than trialling them on your own. She also felt that it was important to set goals within the CoP setting as a means of reflecting on her practice: “Yes. I think in terms of the goal-setting it was really positive because it pulled you back to those goals and you were constantly reflecting on your practice and those sorts of things and that was a really positive.” Feedback was also important for P4 who found the iterative process of feedback within the CoP best assisted his learning:

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

35

So, with the PLT, I was just working with my mentor and a few others. I’d been presented with a few ideas. I went away, created what I wanted to do, showed the mentor then got a bit more feedback on that. I had my plan out and the mentor gave me a few really good ideas. You’re doing this. I’ve seen an example where that’s done differently like this. It was fantastic.

These examples align with Desimone and Garet’s (2015) features of effective professional learning that is focused on relevant content and involves active learning on the part of the teacher, including having goals (P3) and receiving feedback (P4). Reflective inquiry will also be addressed in Chapter 6 in a Northern Ireland context. Each ECT felt that although the CG group was beneficial in their first two years of teaching, it gradually became less relevant and actually proved to be burdensome because of the level of data that was required to be collected. Initially, they valued having a defined group where they could share ideas at both the practical and theoretical level and how that informed their teaching strategies. Participants said that while the conversation process was useful for self-reflection, as the CG activities evolved during the year, data collection and the review graphs were problematic, and the process became just a “tick a box” (P2). One participant (P4) said that the CG leader was also his allocated mentor teacher at school, so there was a lot of cross-over between CoP activities and personal mentoring. He also noted that the CG was an extension of what he was doing anyway. Another participant (P2) said “I think the PLT is better now because you can at least work on something that you need too.” It was noted that PLT groups enabled open communication, within a small group of five or six members, with different levels of experience. P1 noted that the social learning space created by the PLT provided opportunities that were more than casual support and “involved different, deeper thinking strategies and perspectives, provided academic rigour” referencing educational experts, such as De Bono (1985) and Piaget (1951), whose ideas were discussed by CoP members and informed classroom teaching and their own professional development. P1 also valued the interdepartmental conversations enabled by the PLT space and articulated the “value of applying ideas from different disciplines and pedagogical conversations to their own discipline/context.” It is interesting to note that as the ECTs developed their teaching skills they found their own, school-based CoPs, more engaging and relevant to their immediate needs, than professional development delivered by external providers. This relates to findings of Calvert (2016) who highlights the importance of teacher agency that is lacking when professional development is orchestrated by administrators, provided by external vendors, and involves little or no follow-up.

Teacher Agency ECTs that are nurtured within a CoP have the opportunity to develop teacher agency in terms of having the confidence to move beyond their comfort zone—in applying for leadership positions but also in supporting the next wave of beginning teachers

36

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

coming into the school (Evans et al., 2017). The ECTs articulated that over the timespan of the research the support and professional growth provided within the social learning spaces not only enabled them to move from being the novice teachers seeking support to confident practitioners, but also to provide a professional learning model to emulate their CoP experience to support other ECTs new to the school. They felt they had been able to influence newer/younger teachers coming to school through their involvement in the CoPs. For example, P4 said that “socially, though, one of the new teachers this year who’s just started lives next door to me. So, I’ve caught up with him a few times, just trying to help out and talk. So, informally, I do talk to new staff often.” P4 also said, “So when I do get the times to talk to new staff I do help out. I did mentor—not officially—but unofficially I mentored a staff member.” The fact that these ECTs can now move from being mentored to being a mentor reflects the professional growth and agency they have developed. It is also an area for further research as both the immediate physical proximity, and the opportunity to move from mentee to mentor may be unique, or as least strongly influenced by the rural location. Other ways that the participants showed their increasing agency was the way they began sharing resources and leading key initiatives. For example, P2 said she was currently helping run a Literacy for Learning PLT, with the goal of improving literacy across the school and suggested, “the Literacy for Learning is definitely great. And that’s a school-wide thing that we’re hoping to build in.” She also mentioned another resource that her CoP generated was a Humanities domain checklist, and members are “looking at how we can re-adjust our assignments and rubrics and all those sorts of things.” The generation of output or reification of knowledge from a CoP is one of Wenger’s (1998) foundational understandings of the CoP model of domain/community/practice that was discussed in Chapter 1. Reification is, in effect, the observable output from the CoP’s practice, that it shares with the wider community. Its importance is that it both embodies the history of the CoP and gives it a profile within the wider school community. With the benefit of feedback from other members outside the CoP, the CoP itself can move forward with greater clarity and strengthen and extend its work.

Scaffolding Leadership An interesting outcome of this research was that each of the five ECTs who were reinterviewed in 2019 had attained a leadership position in the past three years. Some were more senior or significant roles than others, but they all carried with them responsibility and a degree of recognition within the school community. A key outcome for P4 was being able to apply for a leadership position working with student leaders in his third year at the school. He reflected in his 2019 interview on the journey from his late start in 2016 to his appointment as a leader in 2018:

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

37

Yes, because I was a bit lost. Didn’t know where to go. But by the end of the year I was very, very confident. I am very confident in my role now, being able to push further. I just wanted to get my practice right and get the most out of myself because there wasn’t that pressure. More confident. I think the big thing is confidence in my style.

As well as the support from the CoPs that he was involved with, P4 was also supported by the principal’s assistant once he attained the leadership position, and “met with her at least six or seven times throughout the year and had like, two or three-hour meetings, just planning and having that support.” This reflects the culture of growth within the school where all staff, including auxiliary staff, are ready to support and encourage ECTs. As P4 noted, the school has been very supportive in allowing young staff members to “push up.” He said that he knew of another staff member (P5), almost the same age as him, who had a senior position of leadership. He said that these kind of leadership opportunities for ECTs were unusual, saying that “it was implied at university that you’re not going to get a Position of Leadership before 30. It just doesn’t happen.” The importance of a whole school environment to support ECTs will be picked up in Chapter 5 in a Flemish context. Similarly, P2 had her transition to a curriculum leader position scaffolded by being allowed to share the position with another teacher. This is an ideal way for an ECT to learn the skills of leadership without the pressures of doing it on their own. As she reflected, “Oh yes. I think that there has been a lot of supportive people within this school in particular, so that you feel confident enough to go for a domain leader or whatever as well.” Another person (P1) also reflected that “PLT membership demystified leadership roles,” in the sense that he knew many of the people on a personal level through his CoP who were in leadership positions and felt he could ask them anything he needed to know about the positions he was going for. He reflected: I think those groups are much better for communication because you can talk freely. Because our staff meetings are so large—like it’s over 100 staff. It’s just I wouldn’t put my hand up and complain. It’s too intimidating. But in the small groups you can really discuss it out.

In schools with even larger staff, the importance of having intimate CoPs where ECTs can freely express their concerns and/or access the information they need in applying for leadership positions cannot be underestimated. The significance of seeing other leadership positions being filled by younger teachers was important for P4 who noted: Leadership is definitely encouraged for people who are putting their hand up and seem capable. Another person, the exact same age, is the Curriculum Head was appointed to Student Leadership Co-ordinator last year and this year I’m the Staff representative on the Leadership team as well.

The support of more experienced teachers was noted by P3, who also took on a leadership role prior to her impending maternity leave. Similar to P1, she highlighted the intimacy of the CoPs to which she had belonged and the long-term relationships that had formed within them: “And even those people I was in the group with, now even, three or four years down the track, I know that I can still go and ask them

38

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

things.” This highlights the importance of the more experienced members of the Rural College community. Not only were they there to support the ECTs in applying for leadership roles, but there was no evidence of them trying to cling to senior positions as might occur in some metropolitan schools. They also were invested with the “tacit knowledge” that rich depth of untapped knowledge that resides in organisations such as schools (Kemmis et al., 2014) and which the ECTs were fortunate to benefit from through the Communities of Practice.

Conclusion and Implications The grounded theory approach generated findings that support the theory that Communities of Practice support the retention and career progression of Early Career Teachers, as evidenced in research in this Australian rural college context. Participation in the Communities of Practice created a sense of engaged belonging for the ECTs, leading to career persistence, sustainability of the teaching role and stability within the rural context. Participation also created a culture that encouraged ECTs to take the leadership opportunities, which also enhanced career persistence and commitment to their rural location. Key themes that emerged from data analysis and coding were: the importance of the supportive community, including the specific selection of appropriate mentors; the positive experience of teaching in the rural location; the importance of opportunities to learn new skills and share teaching strategies within the social learning community; a growth culture that fostered a sense of agency; scaffolding of leadership skills; and opportunities for permanent positions and rapid career progression. The ECT responses that we have showcased all articulated that their CoP experiences and the supportive environment they had been part of for the past three years had a very positive impact on their teaching confidence, practice and professional identities (Morrison, 2013). The opportunities for these ECTs to establish their teaching career and the support and encouragement that was provided for them to take on leadership roles was a strong theme that emerged from the interview data. Unlike many of their contemporaries in other rural or remote schools, who served their year or two at the school and then exited back to the city, they stayed on. They formed personal and professional roots in the school community and took to leadership positions that developed their professional identity (Netolicky, 2016). This research demonstrated that CoPs provided both the support and advice from more senior teachers, and from peers within the CoPs, to enable the ECTs to feel confident to apply for leadership positions. As was noted earlier, there are mixed benefits in getting a senior leadership role very early in a teaching career (Graham, Paterson, & Miller, 2008); however, in this instance the positive benefits appeared to prevail in the responses of all the ECTs. Further research is needed to identify how Initial Teacher Education (ITE) programmes prepare ECTs for the range of experiences identified in this study, such as managing mentoring relationships, social

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

39

learning situations, contract teaching, working in a rural context and early career leadership roles. Reflecting on their three year ECT learning journey, P4 spoke of the modelling of leadership from his other ECT friends which encouraged him to put his hand up: So, I consider myself very lucky that I was able to find that network straight away. And similar experience as well. And that would be the biggest influence on me and seeing how well they go and seeing how they’ve pushed themselves forward. That probably benchmarks for me because if I did not have colleagues around the same age as me going for positions of leadership, pushing themselves, would I have done that? Would I have been the first person to take that step?

The CoP provided the context for opportunities for peers to informally explore leadership opportunities as noted by P4 who said “I can just informally, not just as a professional conversation, just as friend, ask, should I go, should I put my hand up for this position.” While evidence suggests that the CoP experience enabled ECTs to make early progression to leadership roles in rural schools, further research is needed to compare experiences of ECTs in other contexts to identify if this accelerated career progression is unique to this rural school. While the CoP provided social and professional support, leading to sustained positions and leadership opportunities at the school, further research is also needed to establish if the rural context was an advantage or disadvantage to the career paths of these ECTs. The experience of these ECTs illustrates the intersection of CoP social learning theory and practice with professional development theory such as teacher agency (Calvert, 2016) and the value of Communities of Practice to provide the context for ECTs to thrive, not just survive. P4 will have the final word to capture the value of the ECT CoP experience: And looking back now, I don’t know how I would be functional at all in that role without that support. It wasn’t, this is what you have to do. It was just presenting some ideas and giving me a starting point. I was fine after that. I feel that I’ve got fantastic experiences here in developing my own practice and resume. (P4)

The ECTs referred to in this chapter benefitted from supportive Communities situated within the school that showed evidence of having a culture of learning and growth. A culture of growth is evident in schools where there is high human, social and decisional capital within their staff, who work collaboratively through Communities of Practice to improve student outcomes (Fullan & Quinn, 2016; Garmston & Wellman, 2016). This does not happen by chance. Further research is needed into cultivating a culture of growth, including leadership roles; how this culture can be best cultivated by different CoPs within different contexts; the experience of ECTs in rural locations; how Communities of Practice and/or other social learning spaces impact on the retention of ECTs and the value of CoPs to relevant stakeholders. Chapter 3 will explore how the leaders of this school developed—the principal and the Professional Development Co-ordinator—and nurtured the culture of their school by building up the human, social and decisional capital within their staff. Following that, Chapter 4 will explore other ways in which ECTs that do not have the type of support we have shown, can seek support by engaging in online Communities of Practice.

40

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

Key Takeaways • • • • •

Value of CoPs in supporting ECT’s Importance of culture of growth Providing Early Career Teachers context and opportunity to develop agency Cultivation of factors influencing CoP sustainability Rural context provides career opportunities and challenges for Early Career Teachers.

References AITSL. (2019). Initial teacher education: Data report 2019. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu. au/research/ite-data-report-2019. Burke, P., Aubusson, P., Schuck, S., Buchanan, J., & Prescott, A. (2015). How do early career teachers value different types of support? A scale-adjusted latent class choice model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.01.005. Butler, D. L., Schnellert, L., & MacNeil, K. (2015). Collaborative inquiry and distributed agency in educational change: A case study of a multi-level community of inquiry. Journal of Educational Change, 16(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-014-9227-z. Calvert, L. (2016). Moving from compliance to agency: What teachers need to make professional learning work. Retrieved from Oxford, OH: http://nctaf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/NCT AFLearning-Forward_Moving-from-Compliance-to-Agency_What-Teachers-Needto-MakeProfessional-Learning-Work.pdf. Charmaz, K. (2001). Grounded theory: Methodology and theory construction. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (Vol. 10, pp. 6396–6399). https://doi.org/10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/00775-0. Cherkowski, S., & Schnellert, L. (2017). Exploring teacher leadership in a rural, secondary school: Reciprocal learning teams as a catalyst for emergent leadership. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 8(1), 6–25. Clandinin, D. J. (2007). Handbook of narrative Inquiry: Mapping a methodology. Sage. De Bono, E. (1985). Six thinking hats. London: Penguin Books. Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teachers’ professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society and Education, 7(3), 252–263. DeVore-Wedding, B. R. (2017). Beyond the city lights: A multiple-case study of successful, experienced secondary science teachers in rural schools. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/ docview/2101362929?accountid=13552. Downes, N., & Roberts, P. (2018). Revisiting the schoolhouse: A literature review on staffing rural, remote and isolated schools in Australia 2004–2016. Australian & International Journal of Rural Education, 28(1), 31–54. Evans, C., Waring, M., & Christodoulou, A. (2017). Building teachers’ research literacy: Integrating practice and research. Research Papers in Education, 32(4), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02671522.2017.1322357. Fox, A., Wilson, E., & Deaney, R. (2011). Beginning teachers’ workplace experiences: Perceptions of and use of support. Vocations and Learning, 4(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12186-0109046-1. Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2002). Teachers as leaders: Exploring the impact of teacher-led development work. School Leadership & Management, 22(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/136324302 2000007728.

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

41

Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. Journal of Staff Development, 28(3), 35. Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts and systems. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin. Garmston, R. J., & Wellman, B. M. (2016). The adaptive school: A source book for developing collaborative groups. England: Plymouth. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2006). Grounded theory strategies for qualitative researach. New Brunswick, USA and London: Aldine Transactioj. Graham, L., Miller, J., & Paterson, D. (2009). Early career leadership opportunities in Australian rural schools. Education in Rural Australia, 19(3), 25–34. Graham, L., Paterson, D., & Miller, J. (2008). Leadership in Australian rural schools: Bush track, fast track. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au/login?url=https://search.ebscohost. com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED502757&site=ehost-live&scope=site. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (2013). The constructivist credo. California: Left Coast Press. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York: Routledge and Teachers College Press. Harmsen, R., Helms-Lorenz, M., Maulana, R., & van Veen, K. (2018). The longitudinal effects of induction on beginning teachers’ stress. The British Journal of Educational Pschology, 89(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12238. Heffernan, A., Longmuir, F., Bright, D., & Misol, K. (2019). Perceptions of teachers and teaching. Retrieved from https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/2090344/Percep tions-of-Teachers-and-Teaching-in-Australia-report-No. Holloway, I., & Wheeler, S. (2002). Qualitative research in nursing (Vol. 2). Oxford: Blackwell Science. Holmes, K., Preston, G., Shaw, K., & Buchanan, R. (2013). “Follow” Me: Networked professional learning for teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(12). Huggins, K. S., Lesseig, K., & Rhodes, H. (2017). Rethinking teacher leader development: A study of early career mathematics teachers. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 8(2), 28–48. Kelly, N., & Fogarty, R. (2015). An integrated approach to attracting and retaining teachers in rural and remote parts of Australia. Journal of Economic and Social Policy, 17(2), 1–17. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J, Edwards-Groves, C, Hardy, I, Grootenboe, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education. In S. S. H. N. Y. D. London. Knight, J. (2019). Why teacher autonomy is central to coaching success. A Culture of Coaching, 77(3), 14–20. Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56(3), 257–278. https://doi. org/10.17763/haer.56.3.bj2h231877069482. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimated peripheral participation. United States of America: Cambridge University Press. Lazarus, S. S. (2003). Preparing rural educators to teach students in an era of standards-based reform and accountability. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/62156896?acc ountid=13552. Lieberman, A., Campbell, C., & Yashkina, A. (2016). Teacher learning and leadership: Of, by, and for teachers. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/lib/USQ/ detail.action?docID=465895. Lindqvist, P., Nordänger, U. K., & Carlsson, R. (2014). Teacher attrition the first five years—A multifaceted image. Teaching and Teacher Education, 40, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate. 2014.02.005. MacGillivray, A. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technologies for communities. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 11(4), 99. Malloy, W. W., & Allen, T. (2007). Teacher retention in a teacher resiliency-building rural school. The Rural Educator, 28(2), 10–27.

42

J. McDonald and B. M. Mercieca

Mantei, J., & Kervin, L. (2011). Turning into teachers before our eyes: The development of professional identity through professional dialogue. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1), 1–17. McCluskey, K., Sim, C., & Johnson, G. (2011). Imagining a profession: A beginning teacher’s story of isolation. Teaching Education, 22(1), 79–90. McDonald, J. (2014). Community, domain, practice: Facilitator catch cry for revitalizing learning and teaching through communities of practice. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resourcecommunity-domain-pr…. McKenzie, P., Kos, J., Walker, M., Hong, J., & Owen, S. (2014). Staff in Australia’s schools 2014: Main report on the survey. Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/. Mercieca, B. (2018). Companions on the journey: An exploration of the value of communities of practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia (Doctor of Philosophy). University of Southern Queensland. Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/ 34618/. Mercieca, B., & Kelly, N. (2018). Early career teacher peer support through private groups in social media. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1359866X.2017.1312282. Miller, J., Graham, L., & Paterson, D. (2006). Bush tracks: Viewing teachers’ experiences of leadership in rural schools through a contextual lens. Education in Rural Australia, 16(2), 31–45. Morrison, C. (2013). Teacher identity in the early career phase: Trajectories that explain and influence development. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ ajte.2013v38n4.5. Murdock, B. B. (1985). The contributions of Hermann Ebbinghaus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11(3), 469–471. https://doi.org/10.1037/02787393.11.3.469. Myschool. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.myschool.edu.au/. Netolicky, D. (2016). Rethinking professional learning for teachers and school leaders. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 1(4), 270–285. Netolicky, D. (2020). Transformative professional learning: Making a difference in schools. London: Routledge. Oddone, K., Hughes, H., & Lupton, M. (2019). Teachers as connected professionals: A model to support professional learning through personal learning networks. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. Ovenden-Hope, T., Blandford, S., Cain, T., & Maxwell, B. (2018). RETAIN early career teacher retention programme: Evaluating the role of research informed continuing professional development for a high quality, sustainable 21st century teaching profession. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 44(5), 590–607. Pegg, J., & Panizzon, D. (2011). Collaborative innovations with rural and regional secondary teachers: Enhancing student learning in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 23(2), 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-011-0009-0. Piaget, J. (1951). Play, dream and imitation in childhood. London: Routledge. Plunkett, M., & Dyson, M. (2011). Becoming a teacher and staying one: Examining the complex ecologies associated with educating and retaining new teachers in rural Australia. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n1.3. Rubin, H. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Sternberg, R. J., & Horvath, J. A. (1999). Tacit knowledge in professional practice: Researcher and practitioner perspectives. Psychology Press. Tonna Michelle, A., Bjerkholt, E., & Holland, E. (2017). Teacher mentoring and the reflective practitioner approach. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 6(3), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-04-2017-0032. United Kingdom Government. (2013). Teachers’ standards. Retrieved from Teachers’ Standards (https://www.publishing.service.gov.uk).

2 The Value of Communities of Practice for Early Career Teachers

43

VIT. (2020). VIT new teacher registration system. Retrieved from https://www.vit.vic.edu.au/regist ered-teacher/VITs-new-teacher-registration-system. Walker-Gibbs, B., Ludecke, M., & Kline, J. (2018). Pedagogy of the rural as a lens for understanding beginning teachers’ identity and positionings in rural schools. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 26(2), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2017.1394906. Watling, C. J., & Lingard, L. (2012). Grounded theory in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 70. Medical Teacher, 34(10), 850–861. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2012.704439. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E. (2009). Social learning capability: Four essays on innovation and learning in social systems. In Social innovation, Sociedade e Trabalho. Lisbon, Portugal: MTTS/GEP & EQUAL. Weldon, P. (2016). Out-of-field teaching in Australian secondary schools. Retrieved from https:// research.acer.edu.au/policyinsights/6/. Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of practice: A handbook. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2020). Learning to make a difference (Vol. 1: Value creation in social learning spaces). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & de Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/resour ces/publications/evaluation-framework/. Wenger-Trayner, E., Wenger-Trayner, B., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Hutchinson, S., & Kubiak, C. (2014). Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning. Routledge. Willis, J., Crosswell, L., Morrison, C., Gibson, A., & Ryan, M. (2017). Looking for leadership: The potential of dialogic reflexivity with rural early-career teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(7), 794–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1287695.

Chapter 3

Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice Bernadette Mary Mercieca

and Jacquelin McDonald

Abstract The important role of the leaders, including the principal and middle-level leaders in developing a culture of growth and professional learning within a school community has been well documented in contemporary scholarship literature. This chapter examines this role and that of the middle-level professional development leaders within the context of a regional secondary school in Victoria, Australia. This school excelled in the ways in which it engaged its teaching staff in various Communities of Practice over a three-year period. Qualitative data revealed that the principal and key middle-level leaders had an expansive vision and were able to move their staff to engage with each other collaboratively and constructively to support the professional learning of all teachers, but especially the early career teachers. They were also able to model distributive leadership that radiated out to other departments in the school. This chapter concludes with ways in which the principal and middlelevel leaders can best support and sustain the Communities of Practice within their school community. Keywords Principal · Community of practice · Distributed leadership · Middle-level leaders · Sustaining · Sponsoring

Introduction A leader is one who sees more than other sees, who sees farther than others see, and who sees before others see. (Eimes, 2015)

Few would doubt the importance of the principal and other key middle-level leaders in a school for establishing and sustaining Communities of Practice (CoPs). The role of principal has evolved over time—where once they were considered as managers of their school at the top of a hierarchical system somewhat removed from their staff, contemporary models now place them as enablers of shared routines and collective outcomes with a strong moral purpose to improve student outcomes and support the professional learning of their teachers (Buttram & Farley-Ripple, 2016; Heffernan, 2018; Lovett, 2018; Wilkinson & Kemmis, 2015). In particular, Attard Tonna, Bjerkolt and Holland (2017) speak of a multi-perspective approach to mentoring beginning teachers, including all layers of a school community, including © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_3

45

46

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

the principal. They are also responsible for building and supporting teacher agency for all teachers—teachers’ active roles in shaping their work (Netolicky, Andrews, & Paterson, 2018). As discussed in Chapter 2, teacher agency can be considered in terms of Early Career Teachers (ECTs) having the confidence to move beyond their comfort zone and to take responsibility for their own professional development (Evans, Waring, & Christodoulou, 2017). Further, teacher agency for all teachers is an important aspect of schools that foster a culture of growth where learning is the norm and a shared enterprise. A culture of growth is evident in schools where there is high human capital (how good we are alone), social capital (how we get better together) and decisional capital (how we get better over time) within the staff and their leaders who work collaboratively to improve student outcomes (Fullan & Quinn, 2016; Garmston & Wellman, 2016; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2013). Netolicky et al. (2018) maintain that when the “grassroots” of the school system are trusted and the teachers possess agency, then many possibilities can ensure such as a more personalised and relevant curriculum and evidence-based learning leading to better student outcomes and collaborative ventures leading to a more engaged and supportive staff (p. 64). Earlier voices such as Wenger (1998) and Wenger, Trayner and de Laat (2011) speak of leaders as having enabling value and also noted in the Value Creation Framework (Wenger-Trayner, 2014; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2020), that makes the life of the community possible, providing guidance, funding and legitimacy for collaborative activities. Further, Benoliel and Schechter (2017), as part of their research about teacher attributes that contributed to the success of CoPs, found a number of important characteristics that principals shared. These included establishing an atmosphere of trust within the staff and providing a safe environment where a diverse range of teachers could share their knowledge and feelings and engage in difficult/contentious conversations without fear that they would be reprimanded—“a safe practice field where multiple perspectives are crystallized” (p. 229). This aligns with the findings of Fullan (2019) in regards to “nuanced leadership” in which principals are experts in humanity, knowing their staff intimately and working consistently to develop strong mutual trust and commitment with them (p. 12). Principals also have an important role, Benoliel and Schechter (2017) suggest, in terms of establishing the structural elements that will ensure the success of CoPs, both from managerial and leadership perspectives. From a managerial perspective, they need to ensure that staff have a clear idea of what they are being asked to do, that adequate time for staff gatherings is allocated and that a step by step plan is developed. From a leadership perspective, they suggest that principals can promote knowledge sharing by building a culture that values collaboration and social relationships. They also need to ensure that staff have the chance to learn the appropriate social and networking skills which will best serve the CoP: “For instance, to promote knowledge sharing, principals can encourage team diversity by building teams that include members with a mix of strong social skills and external networking ability” (Benoliel & Schechter, 2017, p. 229). Finally, Gilchrist (2018) highlights an adaptive approach in suggesting that principals need to be sensitive to how their staff are responding to the plans put forward and be willing to adjust them as time goes on: “This requires sympathetic

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

47

and empathetic management from school leaders” (p. 43). It is a sign of a sensitive or nuanced principal who can see that their staff are not happy with particular programmes that are no longer working and respond in appropriate ways. This will be evident in an example from Rural College later in this chapter.

The Role of the Principal in Sustaining Communities of Practice In recent decades, there has been an increasing emphasis on the principal being responsible for the professional development of their staff and understanding them as adult learners (Ehrich, Simpson, & Wilkinson, 1995; Koonce, Pijanowski, Bengtson, & Lasater, 2019). Ehrich et al. (1995) outlines eight features of adult learning which include adults engaging in learning through their own volition and bringing their own experiences to learning. Further, they learn at different speeds and in collaborative settings where there is the opportunity for reflection. These features of adult learning underpin the characteristics of a principal in relation to sustaining Communities of Practice along with other moral and ethical considerations and leadership approaches that will now be explored.

Holding the Reins Cranston (2009) uses a powerful metaphor in understanding the role of the principal as the one who holds the reins in being able to support their staff as they grow as a community of learners and practitioners and implement change. This involves having an expansive vision for what can be achieved and a deep understanding of how CoPs function, which is aligned with, and shared with, their school community, helping to forge a unity of purpose (Edge, Reynolds, & O’Toole, 2015; Fullan, 2019; Mullen & Hutinger, 2008). Principals need to be able to establish a school environment where learning, dialogue and critical reflection are at the forefront of the CoPs that are established (DeMatthews, 2014). In essence, the principals become the change agent with the school community, fostering opportunities that encourage innovation (Gray & Summers, 2015). As such, they need to have a clear idea of where they are as a school and where they are going to, not where someone outside the school thinks they are or thinks they should be (Gilchrist, 2018). This rests on a detailed understanding of the school and its broader context: “That detail can be liberating when linked to a higher purpose and that purposeful experience is the bedrock of insights” (Fullan, 2019, p. 5). This detailed understanding takes time to develop but, we suggest, might be achieved through actively engaging with staff on a regular basis, supported by measures such as surveys or interviews with the whole staff and key stakeholders. McDonald et al. (2012) note that practising the craft of leadership includes, “scanning

48

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

the broad institutional context and positioning the CoP to succeed within that context, as well as facilitating the internal CoP processes to achieve members’ learning and teaching goals” (p. 12). It is also important to note that in holding the reins principals need to do so lightly and without undue control or micromanagement. They need to have a “readiness to let go of the need for control and a willingness to welcome staff leadership and initiative” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018, p. 10). This is further supported by Netolicky et al. (2018) whose research found that school leaders needed to be discerning in terms of knowing when to be visible and charismatic and when to step aside and allow others to lead. Brown, MacGregor, and Flood (2020) speak of a distributive leadership process that draws on the “collective wisdom and expertise of an organisation which can result in new knowledge and practices” (p. 3). A further metaphor of the principal is as a conductor of a symphony orchestra (Danielson, 2016). In this scenario, each teacher plays an instrument such as a violin or percussion instruments and the role of the principal is “ensuring the right balance between the different sections of the orchestra and monitoring the effects of their collective effort” (p. 20). This metaphor shows the importance of the principal being able to both inspire the teachers they work with but also to recognise and respect the expertise that exists, as they and their “players” work together independently, but also contribute to an overall harmony.

Ensuring All Voices Are Heard In their research with middle and high school principals, Shaked and Schechter (2016) found that principals “must respect various voices, and work to establish a common path” (p. 191), while Wilhelm (2013) suggests that the “voice and expertise of teachers are essential to improve teaching and learning” (p. 62). The door of a principal’s office cannot remain closed and staff gatherings need to be places of dialogue rather than passive listening. This essentially involves working with staff at a grassroots level rather than imposing ideas from above and underlies Fullan’s (2019) three-pronged framework for nuanced leadership which includes: • Jointly determined enterprise—developing a sense of collective purpose with their staff; • Adaptability—being able to adjust or pivot according to what is learnt over time; and • Culturally based accountability—establishing strong mutual connection and responsibility through trust and interaction (p. 13). Leaders need to understand their context intimately and be aware of the challenges that their staff in CoPs might be struggling with, what is inspiring and engaging them and what ideas, crazy or not, they have for the future (Fullan, 2019). Critical conversations between teacher leaders and principals are important in ensuring the good health of the CoPs (DeMatthews, 2014). An atmosphere of trust and mutuality

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

49

is empowering for teachers, especially early career teachers—as one participant in the study of Hallam, Smith, Hite, Hite, and Wilcox (2015) indicated, “I can do more when I know my principal trusts me” (p. 205), while Browning (2019) believes that trust is the key resource for school improvement, suggesting that it is “the lubricant which makes it possible for schools to work” (p. 207).

Ethical Leadership Others view principals from a moral or ethical purpose. Lovett (2018) speaks of moral purpose in these terms: the moral courage to grasp the nettle, collegially, as a principled collective, one marked by risk-taking, confronting institutional inertia and rendering visible the largely invisible nature of teacher leadership work. She suggests that the collective focus of leadership is to improve student outcomes which arises through assisting teachers to work at their best. This is achieved through collaborative rather than individual achievements and capacity building, “from knowing that colleagues can achieve more when they combine their expertise and share the same moral purpose” (p. 63). Similarly, Knight (2016) speaks of the values that are part of having ethical leadership: The most common desired values for leaders to possess as cited by employees are integrity, trust honesty and excellence. But to be an ethical leader it is also necessary to specifically develop the “softer” personal conscience values of Fairness, Forgiveness and Altruistic Love as well as the self-determination values of Purpose, Courage and Resilience. (p. 8)

These are high ideals but ones that Knight (2016) believes underlie optimal leadership practice which is evidenced in terms of treating people equally, helping them learn from their mistakes and being attuned to both the personal and professional needs of their staff.

The Leader as Learner Fullan (2019) maintains that “leaders need to learn and lead in equal measure” (p. 72). Learning for a principal has many dimensions but includes being able to draw on the wisdom and insight of those they work with and to be able to learn from experience and adapt when strategies do not work. The principal is also called to model an approach of inquiry, recognising and valuing strengths, engaging people and sharing leadership and having the necessary conversations and doing the necessary research in order to know what initiatives they are launching (Wenger-Trayner & WengerTrayner, 2018). This aligns with the partnership model that Chapter 6 describes, where the principal and skilled teacher educator operate within a community of reflective inquiry to support the professional learners and participants.

50

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

Honouring People’s Histories and Contexts Understanding their local context is crucial for principals if they are to be effective in sponsoring the professional development of their staff (Netolicky, 2019). As discussed in Chapter 2, different issues will clearly face principals who lead, for example, in rural or remote contexts compared with metropolitan contexts, or in traditional, as opposed to more progressive schools. Principals in rural and remote communities, for example, can have trouble attracting and retaining quality or specialised teachers (Bradbeer, 2019). Problems can also arise with staff who are resistant to change as Koonce, Pijanowski, Bengtson and Lasater’s (2019) study of 249 US public school principals showed in relation to staff engagement with professional learning. This study found that forty per cent of principals experienced resistance to change in their staff often because of a top-down approach that did not give enough attention to teacher voice. Koonce et al. (2019) maintain principals can deal with resistance with appropriate support such as instructional coaching and regular consultation of staff to understand their professional development needs. Saldana (2017) points to the importance of leaders developing trust and increased dialogue within their community, so that over time, projects can be initiated with a shared vision and community focus and being always open to new ideas and new members. New Zealand author, Lovett (2018), summarises many of the aforementioned ideas in her diagram of the indicators of schools with collaborative cultures in relation to principals (Fig. 3.1). It shows that principals and teachers come together in the top of the T through a “solid sense of trust between principals and teachers” (Lovett, 2018, p. 94). This takes time to develop and is challenging work, she suggests, but it is important to teacher learning and changes in practices. The vertical part of the figure T shows the ways that trusting relationships develop between the principal and their teachers, such as through working together, being socially connected, being action focused and having a strong moral purpose. The outer details relate to the practical ways in which the principal and the teachers can achieve this collaborative culture. These characteristics of principals who engage positively with their school communities to oversee and champion their collaborative professional development efforts will emerge in more practical contexts in the findings section of this chapter.

Distributed Leadership Distributed leadership can take many forms depending on how it is distributed, but it is defined as a form of leadership that focuses on different leaders being able to emerge in different contexts with “individuals who trust and respect each other’s contribution” (Jones, 2017, p. 20). In practice, Jones (2017) suggests, this involves a reflective approach to leadership and an openness to dialogue between leaders

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

51

Fig. 3.1 Indicators of Schools with Collaborative Cultures (Reprinted with permission Lovett, 2018, p. 94)

so that actions can be honestly critiqued or challenged and shared, active engagement is encouraged. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), distributed leadership is “a reflection of leadership being shown by the principal, but also of others acting as leaders in school” (OECD, 2016, p. 15). Both Jones (2017) and Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) speak of an “ecology of leadership” where there is the potential for many people to take on different types of leadership and where leaders model a collaborative approach by engaging in shared leadership with their executive teams (Jones, 2017, p. xii; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2020). Gronn (2010), an early advocate of the term “distributed leadership,” notes that: The totality of organisational influence is not concentrated in or monopolised by just one person, but instead is dispersed or shared around, so that there are a number of sources of influence, initiative taking or forward thinking. (p. 417)

This is further supported by DeMatthews (2014) who argues for distributed leadership where leadership is spread across the school involving a range of middle

52

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

level as well as executive-level leaders and extends beyond administration to “profound levels of collective action” (p. 183). It is a form of leadership where who leads and who follows depends on the situation and who has the required knowledge rather than who has the traditional hierarchical role, a countercultural approach in many ways (Gronn, 2010). Similarly, Jones (2017) contrasts distributive leadership with traditional models in terms of it being based on trust, rather than regulation, and shared processes and decision-making rather than a top-down approach. This has implications for middle-level leaders, aligning with the research of (Netolicky, 2019) who found that middle-level leaders have a significant—but often unrecognised and under-researched—role to play in leading professional development initiatives. Their unique advantage is that they both teach and lead and so have a more intimate understanding of student and teacher learning needs than a principal might. They are as Hargreaves, Shirley, Wangia, Bacon, and D’Angelo (2018) notes, “the heart and soul of leadership” (p. 127).

A Champion Role in Sponsoring Communities of Practice Wenger (1998) suggests that the leaders of a community such as a school have the opportunity to be champions who can provide sponsorship, guidance, funding and legitimacy for the collaborative activities that occur within a CoP. With their authority and range of influence, they can take on the role of stewarding governance of the CoP through championing the goals that the CoPs develop (Wenger, 2009; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). Further, they are required to: Legitimize the cultivation of Communities of Practice in terms of strategic priorities, ensure that the value of community participation and leadership is widely recognized, and create an environment conducive to sustained learning and honest reflection. (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018, p. 11)

These are important considerations as without such sponsorship the life of any CoP cannot begin, let alone be sustained. A further part of their role is to profile the importance of the CoPs to key stakeholders, which in the context of a school might include the School Board and the systemic managers such as the Education Department or the Diocesan bodies (in the case of religious schools). The importance of this champion role is evidenced by the research and combined twenty-three years of CoP experience by Reaburn and McDonald (2017) who found that CoP success was enhanced by the ability of the CoP champion to engage with senior leadership to promote and create a positive context for the CoP. At a school level, they can add “impact and prestige” by visiting each CoP from time to time and allowing teachers to see that everyone can improve their practice, from the most experienced to the lesser experienced (McDonald, 2014, p. 27).

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

53

The Role of Middle-Level Leaders in Sustaining Communities of Practice As mentioned earlier, middle-level leaders such as the Professional Development (PD) Co-ordinator play a significant role within a school community, helping to bridge any gap that might exist between the principal and their staff. They also have a closer connection to the classroom than the principal in that they generally have a teaching commitment as well as their leadership duties. Grootenboer (2018) highlights the middle role of these leaders and the potential this brings to influence teaching and learning. Within a distributed leadership context, they have a key role in enabling the vision of the principal and his/her team to be translated into practical arrangements with the staff in a school. For example, the PD Co-ordinator could have leadership in setting up and monitoring the life of the CoPs that the school has established. When a school is large and there are many small CoPs, this is a major ongoing task. As the study of Brown et al. (2020) found, when the middle-level leaders have “the confidence, the presence and the understanding of (and ideally experience in) approaches to effective change management” real change can occur (p. 8). Finally, Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) highlight the importance of having key employees, such as middle-level leaders, whose role is to reflect and act strategically in implementing and sustaining the life of the CoPs. This is further supported by Lovett (2018) who believe these type of leadership roles “satisfy teachers’ strong moral commitment to students yet still influence the work of colleagues” (p. 13). The qualities that might assist a middle-level leader include collegiality and team building, as well as having good communication skills, being empathetic and having a capacity for clear decision-making (Gurr, 2019). Wenger, White, and Smith (2009) go further in speaking of social artists who are leaders, other than the principal, whose role is to inspire their colleagues and encourage their involvement in CoPs in order that optimum learning opportunities can arise. In effect, this often is the PD Co-ordinator, but not necessarily so. How these qualities emerge in practice will be seen in later sections in the way L2 and L3 undertook their roles.

The Research Context The school from which data is drawn (henceforth, known as Rural College) is a co-educational secondary Catholic school in rural Victoria, Australia. It has a 2020 enrolment of 1100 students and a teaching staff of over 100 teachers. Its Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage value1 is 1030 relative to an average value 1 The

Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage (ICSEA) is a scale that represents levels of educational advantage. A value on the scale assigned to a school is the average level for all students in the particular school.

54

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

Table 3.1 Demographic details for rural college principal and professional development co-ordinator

Participant

Gender

Years of teaching

Role

L1

Male

>10

Principal

L2

Male

3

PD Co-ordinator 2015–2017

L3

Male

5

PD Co-ordinator 2018

of 1030 (MySchool, 2020). It is a non-selective school, catering for a wide range of student abilities. Two key professional learning ventures were implemented at Rural College in the period from 2015 to 2019. This included a coaching programme from Coaching Group (CG)2 and Professional Learning Teams (PLTs). The former involved having one of each teacher’s classes surveyed once or twice a year, and the results of this being fed back to their coach and then shared within a small group. These coachingbased groups consisted of no more than four teachers and their coach who met on a semi-regular basis to reflect on the data from each teacher’s class. All staff were required to belong to these groups and the coaches were teachers from middle management who were trained in the process. The ECTs interviewed in 2016 found great value in this process, valuing the tacit knowledge of the more experienced teachers in their group (Kemmis et al., 2014) and the particular focus on the classroom. However, by the time of the research in this study, CG had been abandoned and the focus put more on the PLTs. This was due to a number of factors, including that the teachers were finding data collection and interpretation of the review graphs to be increasingly burdensome and problematic and that the process had become just a “tick a box.” The role of the PD Co-ordinator had also changed hands and what had seemed an ideal model for teacher reflection to the previous one (L2) was not such a priority for the new one (L3). On the other hand, the PLTs involved teachers having the chance to nominate areas of interest and then other teachers signing up to meet with them on a regular basis. Up to ten teachers were involved in each PLT and, again, all teachers were required to be involved in this venture. These groups regularly met every fortnight over the course of a year. Details of the principal and the Professional Development Co-ordinator who were interviewed are outlined in Table 3.1.

Methodology Both researchers travelled to the school and spent two days there interviewing the principal (L1) and the current PD Co-ordinator (L3), along with the ECTs described in Chapter 2. However, three years earlier the previous PD Co-ordinator (L2) was also interviewed, so his data is also included. Similar to the methodology described 2 Coaching

Group is a pseudonym to protect the privacy of this business.

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

55

in Chapter 2, this part of the research was conducted by means of semi-structured interviews. The decision to use interviews rather than other methods was made from a pragmatic point of view as all could be conducted over a two day time span and enabled in-depth exploration and follow-up probe questions about ECT experiences and issues. The interviews were face-to-face, which was a more intimate experience that conducting the interviews remotely, allowing the principal to share particular artefacts such as the schools Vision Statement during the course of the interview. They ranged in time from 40 to 50 min and were conducted at mutually agreeable times for the leaders involved. They were recorded electronically and then transcribed by one of the researchers. A constructivist, grounded theory approach was used to code the interviews. This involves creating codes which are individual words, phrases and sentences that can then be put in a systematic order in order to classify and categorise them (Saldana, 2009). They are not predetermined codes but arise out of the data (Charmaz, 2011). Three main steps involved were: • Coding—During the coding process, it is important that the researcher is open to many conceptual possibilities (Watling & Lingard, 2012). Data is analysed line by line. • Constant comparisons—as different scripts are coded, codes are compared and emerging characteristics are noted (Charmaz, 2011). Counterexamples are noted. • Common codes/gerunds/sensitising concepts are formed that allow the researcher to continue to reflect on their data as they begin to write about the data. Saldana (2009) maintains that qualitative inquiry requires “meticulous attention to language and deep reflection on the emergent patterns and meanings of human experience” (p. 21). This attention to detail was of particular importance in these interviews to get an accurate picture of how the school had developed its professional development program. A codebook was created to gather common codes and assists the analysis process.

Findings A number of strong themes emerged from this data related to the principal (L1) and both PD Co-ordinators (L2 and L3) at Rural College that closely align with the literature just discussed. These will each be considered.

Holding the Reins It was evident from the interviews with L1, L2 and L3 that they definitely held the reins (Cranston, 2009) of the Communities of Practice at Rural College in the sense of having a clear vision for what could be achieved and being able to implement this

56

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

vision with good staff uptake. This vision was “to develop a much more re-engaged staff with each other and with their pedagogy in particular—we just wanted to get people into it (L1).” Further, having been in the school for ten years, L1 had a detailed knowledge of his staff and the culture of his school and he knew he could not go forward without having his staff behind him (Fullan, 2019; Netolicky, 2019). As the principal of a relatively stable staff group—“who’d been here for a very long time, were very comfortable and didn’t want to change”—“was a bit like trying to turn the Titanic. It’s just a really long, slow turn (L1).” The strategic step that he and L2 initially took was to survey the staff about what they thought should happen in the school. The main response they received was: We don’t want to have so many staff meetings and we particularly don’t want to have meetings where we’re being talked to and we’re just passive recipients. We’d much rather have an increase in the number of small team gatherings than we have. (L1)

This feedback from the staff gave L1 and L2, the PD Co-ordinator, the moral purpose (Knight, 2016; Lovett, 2018) they needed to set up two different forms of Communities of Practice (CoPs). The first, after a number of regional options were investigated, was to engage a coaching group (hereafter called CG) which was based on three principles of feedback, teacher development and cultural change through cognitive coaching. Middle year managers were trained as coaches by the company. Teachers’ classes were randomly surveyed, and the results distributed to both the teachers and their coaches. The coach then met regularly with the three or four teachers they were coaching, forming a CoP where the data from each teacher was discussed and shared strategies developed to deal with particular issues and create goals. L2 oversaw the work of these CoPs and collaborated with the coaches showing qualities of empathy and capacity for team building in the way he negotiated CoP membership and monitored the life and health of each of the small CoPs. He was in effect, a social artist (Gurr, 2019; Wenger et al., 2009). The second initiative around the same time was the introduction of Professional Learning Teams (PLTs). Teachers were invited to nominate an area of interest or issue that they would like to pursue, and other teachers then had to the opportunity to sign up to join them. Each team had a particular focus or domain and consisted of up to ten teachers who met regularly to work on their practice. The fact that teachers had choice as to which PLT they wished to join reflects the principles of adult education advocated by (Ehrich et al., 1995). By the time, three years later, that L1 and L3 (who took over from L2 as Professional Development Co-ordinator) were interviewed, the decision had been made to disengage the CG. This was indicative of L1 and L3’s sensitivity to the voice of the staff, who had become dissatisfied with what the CG required. Their willingness to alter plans that were no longer working, demonstrates the leadership quality of adaptability mentioned by Fullan (2019). They felt that although the CoPs had appeared to have initially worked well, the data that the company provided was becoming increasingly cumbersome and difficult to interpret and that the large amount of money being spent on this company could be better used. Consequently, the decision was made to discontinue the school’s association with CG, disbanding the related CoPs and

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

57

putting more energy into the PLTs. As L1 reflected, “So we thought of a better way of using our meeting time that we had, and that was professional learning teams. It forms part of our workload.” The idea of including the PLTs as part of each teacher’s workload was a significant way of respecting the staff and being attuned to their needs (Knight, 2016). Schools that ask their staff to work in collaborative groups but do not give them any additional time allowance to do this would appear to be setting themselves up for failure given the busy lives teachers lead. In addition, L1 was happy that the idea to leave CG and work more with PLTs basically came from the staff: “Now, interestingly, that did come from the staff body. And that’s the way I’d love these changes to be driven.” The decision to listen to the staff and respond to it effectively appeared to have enhanced the trust between them and the principal (Browning, 2019; Lovett, 2018). Holding the reins lightly (Netolicky et al., 2018; Wenger-Trayner & WengerTrayner, 2018) was the approach that L1, L2 and later L3 took in helping the staff embrace the PLTs more fully. For example, at first there was considerable flexibility in the topics that the staff were able to choose as the domain for their PLT—hoping to achieve “buy-in” (L1). It was only later in the process that stronger directives were imposed, drawing the focus more tightly around pedagogy. L1 spoke about finding the common ground “between where I want to go and where they might want to go.” He also felt that first rounds of the PLTs should be as non-threatening to people as possible to give them a taste of the experience. The success of the PLTs emerged clearly in the interviews with the leaders. As L3 reflected, “I’d say safely 85% of the staff genuinely find the time useful and everyone is part of it in some way, shape or form.” He went on to talk about the “clear improvements to curriculum and what actually happens in the classroom” that had taken place. Even more significantly, was the increase in collegiality among the staff: “Instead of people just operating in silos, they work in teams now.” He felt that there had been a mindset shift among the staff with the idea of collaboration becoming deeply embedded in their ways of thinking and operating, reflecting the transformative phase noted in Wenger-Trayner (2014) and Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner’s (2020) Value Creation Framework. This buy-in from the staff would appear to be a direct result of the jointly determined change that had taken place (Fullan, 2019). He was also convinced that the success of the PLTs rested on the fact that staff had been listened to: And the PLTs absolutely took off and I am sure it is because people see it as a manifestation of what they were asking for in terms of small group meetings and particularly focused around what they might be doing in a particular subject or an area or a year level but what they’re doing in the classroom. (L3)

This is clear evidence of the voice of the staff being heard and the positive outcomes that ensued (Shaked & Schechter, 2016). L1 was also aware that the success of the PLTs was in part due to the arrival of the early career teachers in 2016 (see Chapter 2). He felt that they were a particularly talented and capable group of young people who “had their finger on the pulse” and had “seen the avenues and opportunities to be able to step into leadership.” He

58

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

also valued the way their new ideas helped to stimulate new thinking with the more experienced staff: Just keeps ideas fresh and I think particularly in a place like ours where we’ve got so many people who’ve been here for a very long time-some of them have never been anywhere elseto get the cross-fertilizing of ideas is very beneficial.

L3’s role was to support the PLTs in continually using the language of collaboration and teams in his interactions with staff—“the language which we use it should be collaborative rather than just saying you go do that”—and to do the behind the scenes work such as ensuring that meeting times were preserved and that people were happy in their groups. It reflects the findings of Netolicky (2019), Hargreaves et al. (2018) and Gurr (2019) about the importance of middle-level leadership being sensitive to the needs of the staff. At a practical level, it would be difficult for CoPs within a school community to survive without the encouragement and organisational expertise of a middle-level leader such as L3.

Distributed Leadership It was clear from the interviews with L1 and L3 that they practised distributed leadership (Brown et al., 2020; Gronn, 2010; Jones & Harvey, 2017). A key initiative was L1’s decision to rotate the chairing of the leadership team which consisted of between 10 and 12 leaders. He indicated that at first they were sceptical, thinking the principal was just trying to opt out of a job, but they eventually came to value the experience—they indicated to him that “I’ve learnt new skills. I’m able to do things I wasn’t able to do before or that I was not sure I could do” (L1). They were also supported by having a critical friend, a kind of mentor. L1 indicated that he felt that the leaders had developed a greater sense of shared responsibility. However, even more than this, the fact that the leadership team chose to model shared leadership was a great way of inspiring the rest of the staff. As L1 reflected: I’ll be very frank. I mean everything you read in terms of leadership, I mean educational leadership, comes home to shared and distributed leadership and a significant part of that is making sure that voices everywhere feel like that they are listened to and feel that they have some kind of input.

This is a principal actively engaged in enabling his staff, allowing them to see that they are in a school where shared leadership and collaboration are valued from the most senior leader to the newest graduate teacher (Fullan, 2007). Evidence for this can be seen in L3’s observation: “Yes, there is a sense of trust and collegiality that comes from that as well. And I think it comes back to how staff within the school interact as well.” L3 went on to speak about the depth of relationships that was becoming more and more evident within the school: “The layers of distributed leadership and collaboration appeared to have filtered down from the principal and his leadership team, to

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

59

the staff in their PLTs and then ultimately to the classroom where changed practices had begun to emerge.” L3 felt that there has been a very clear change in what was happening in the classroom: “There’s probably less chalk and talk and it’s more collaborative.” The leaders who had experienced distributed leadership in the leadership team, in turn used this strategy in leading their curriculum area meetings. As previously noted, this is evidence of the transformative learning noted in WengerTrayner (2014) and Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner et al’s (2020) Value Creation Framework. Drawing on the practical advantage he had as a middle-level leader with a foot in both the classroom and leadership of the staff (Grootenboer, 2018) L3 was able to pinpoint the impact the PLTs were having within the wider school culture: As a team, its distributive leadership as the model we are working for and that language shift has an impact as well on how people think. In terms of other things as to how that is communicated, it really just comes down to individual leaders as well, as to how they manage their teams.

Sustaining Communities of Practice A number of supportive, enabling measures, that were developed by L1 and L3 helped to build the social cohesion of the school just described. One of these enabling strategies was the intentional placement of teachers in staff offices. L3 spoke about how he had worked with other leaders to put people together into staff offices, “not necessarily based on domain, but on shared groups of students and proximity to those students as well.” He felt that this had a positive impact and that staff members enjoyed being “in their little hubs.” In particular, he had been strategic in placing two new graduate teachers together in the same staffroom at the start of the year. These informal spaces appeared to have been very significant in terms of helping the staff build stronger bonds with each other which then flowed over into the PLTs and link with the ideas explored in Chapter 5 about the importance of informal connections such as staff offices in supporting early career teachers. Further team building occurred within particular subject teams with distributed leadership being a feature: “We say, well you’re looking after these other things, who’s going to take this on? We just organically work it out” (L3). L3 felt that there had been a distinct shift in the way language was used in the school—a language that continually spoke about working in teams and collegiality—and that this had impacted on staff members’ thinking and the way that individual leaders organised their teams. This collegiality and emphasis on collaboration reflects the culture of growth (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012) that has permeated the school at every level. L3 felt that the staff had an unusually good working dynamic with each other, very different from portrayal of the staff some years previously who basically taught in silos and “who’d been here for a very long time, were very comfortable and didn’t want to change.” He also noted the positive way in which PLTs were now viewed, not as just another meeting but a real vehicle for professional learning: “There is very little negative talk about PLTs–it’s always positive. They’re like I’m really looking

60

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

forward to doing this.” This is not necessarily a usual way in which teachers respond to professional learning demands. Another strategy that L3 used to build staff collegiality was what he called the Pineapple Chart. This involved him putting a whiteboard in the main staffroom and inviting staff members to indicate when they would open their classroom doors for other staff members to visit: “So, people write up, I’m doing this activity. If anyone wants to come along to see how it’s done–it’s just an open door. Informal. There’s no paperwork. You don’t have to take observation notes. It just if you want to learn how to do something.” He felt this was a great opportunity for some of the more experienced teachers to share their tacit knowledge (Wilkinson & Kemmis, 2015). It also reflects the degree to which the staff felt comfortable enough with each other to do this, knowing they would not be judged or ridiculed. It is a credit to the leadership in this school that such openness now characterises the daily practice and mindset of the staff.

Conclusion and Future Research Overall, the value that L1, L2 and L3 have brought to Rural College through their inspirational leadership, including the coaching CoPs then later with a more focused approach to PLTs, has borne fruit in the sustained teacher collaboration evident in the school. The fact that they can speak of the unusually good working dynamic that exists between teachers in the school and their degree of collegiality where the language of teams and collaboration is the prevailing mindset, speaks clearly of the trusting relationships between the principal and his teachers and with each other that Lovett (2018) described in Fig. 3.1. It is evident that the teachers work together in their PLTs with their champions—L1, L2 and now L3—supporting and encouraging them with a strong moral purpose of improving student outcomes (Lovett, 2018). As L3 summed up, “We are continually just monitoring everything, making sure it’s doing what we need it to do.” This was particularly evident when L1 and L3 heard the voice of increasing staff dissatisfaction with CGs after several years of working with them and acted to terminate their services and move in a new school-based direction. Shared responsibilities are evident in the distributed leadership that was modelled by the principal in the executive team and taken up by the leaders of the various domains. This appeared to allow teachers at the school to know that their voices were heard and that their actions within the PLTs were valued. The sustainability of these PLTs is grounded in the strong sense of collegiality among the staff and in their relationships with L1, L2 and L3, their collaborative mindset and the proactive way in which L1 and L3 monitor and support the PLTs. There is clearly a culture of growth (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012) in this school with high human capital in the confidence that the teachers have shown in knowing their voices were heard; high social capital in the successful PLTs they belong to; and high decisional capital in the distributed leadership which has filtered through from the principal’s team and has become the order of the day in faculty and other types of

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

61

meetings. They will inevitably continue to evolve with sometimes top-down rather than grassroots direction, but the foundations appear to be firmly in place to move forward in a positive way. In finishing, we suggest that future empirical research could look at the strategies for creating a culture of growth in schools and the impact that this might have on the retainment of early career teachers, the enhanced morale of the staff and student attainment. There is also a need for more future research to explore the effectiveness of different approaches to distributed leadership (Brown et al., 2020) and how middle year leaders work within a distributed leadership model.

Key Takeaways • • • •

Value of distributed leadership approach Cultivating distributed leadership roles, at senior, middle level, and coalface levels Leaders seeking and paying attention to voice of coalface teachers Leadership qualities evidenced in the research.

References Attard Tonna, M., Bjerkholt, E., & Holland, E. (2017). Teacher mentoring and the reflective practitioner approach. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 6(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-04-2017-0032. Benoliel, P., & Schechter, C. (2017). Is it personal? Teacher’s personality and the principal’s role in professional learning communities. Improving Schools, 20(3), 222–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1365480217703725. Bradbeer, S. (2019). Context matters: Women leading in rural schools. In D. Netolicky, J. Andrews, & C. Patterson (Eds.), Flipping the system Australia: What matters in education. London: Routledge. Brown, C., MacGregor, S., & Flood, J. (2020). Can models of distributed leadership be used to mobilise networked generated innovation in schools? A case study from England. Teaching and Teacher Education, 94, 103101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103101. Browning, P. (2019). A culture of trust: Key practices of compelling leadership. In D. Netolicky, J. Andrews, & C. Paterson (Eds.), Flip the system Australia: What matters in education. London: Routledge. Buttram, J. L., & Farley-Ripple, E. N. (2016). The role of principals in professional learning communities. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15(2), 192–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2015. 1039136. Charmaz, K. (2011). A constructivist grounded theory analysis of losing and regaining a valued self. In F. J. Wertz, et al. (Eds.), Five ways of doing qualitative analysis: Phenomenological psychology, grounded theory, discourse, analysis, narrative research, and intuitive inquiry. New York: ProQuest Ebook Central: Guilford Publications. Cranston, J. (2009). Holding the reins of the professional learning community: Eight themes from research on principal’s perceptions of professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 90, 1–22.

62

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

Danielson, C. (2016). Creating communities of practice. Educational Leadership, 73(8), 18–23. DeMatthews, D. (2014). Principal and Teacher Collaboration: An Exploration of Distributed Leadership in Professional Learning Communities. International Journal of Educational Leadership and Management, 2(2), 176–206. Edge, K., Reynolds, R., & O’Toole, M. (2015). Contextual complexity: The professional learning experiences of seven classroom teachers when engaged in “quality teaching”. Cogent Education, 2(1), 1120002. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2015.1120002. Ehrich, L., Simpson, T., & Wilkinson, M. (1995). The principal as adult educator in the professional development of teachers. Journal of In-Service Education, 21(2), 67–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0305763950210205. Eimes, L. (2015). Cited in Business News Daily. Evans, C., Waring, M., & Christodoulou, A. (2017). Building teachers’ research literacy: Integrating practice and research. Research Papers in Education, 32(4), 403–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02671522.2017.1322357. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. Journal of Staff Development, 28(3), 35. Fullan, M. (2019). Nuance: Why some leaders succeed and others fail (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts and systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Garmston, R. J., & Wellman, B. M. (2016). The adaptive school: A source book for developing collaborative groups. Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield. Gilchrist, G. (2018). The role of school leaders/principals in practitioner enquiry. In G. Gilchrist (Ed.), Practitioner enquiry: Professional development with impact for teachers, schools and systems. London: Routledge. Gray, J. A., & Summers, R. (2015). International professional learning communities: The role of enabling school structures, trust, and collective efficacy. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 14(3), 61–75. Gronn, P. (2010). Leadership: Its genealogy, configuration and trajectory. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 42(4), 405–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2010.492959. Grootenboer, P. (2018). Theories and models of educational leadership. In The Practices of School Middle Leadership (Vol. 1). Singapore: Springer. Gurr, D. (2019). School middle leaders in Australia, Chile and Singapore. School Leadership & Management, 39(3–4), 278–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2018.1512485. Hallam, P. R., Smith, H. R., Hite, J. M., Hite, S. J., & Wilcox, B. R. (2015). Trust and collaboration in PLC teams: Teacher relationships, principal support, and collaborative benefits. NASSP Bulletin, 99(3), 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636515602330. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York: Routledge, Teachers College Press. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2013). The power of professional capital. International Trends, 34(3). Hargreaves, A., Shirley, D., Wangia, S., Bacon, C., & D’Angelo, M. (2018). Leading from the Middle: Spreading Learning, Well-being, and identity across Ontario. Heffernan, A. (2018). The Principal and School Improvement Theorising Discourse, Policy, and Practice (1st ed.). Singapore: Springer. Jones, S. (2017). Leading the Academy: Distributed leadership in Higher Education. Paper presented at the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia. Jones, S., & Harvey, M. (2017). Revealing the nexus between distributed leadership and communities of practice. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice—Facilitating social learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J, Edwards-Groves, C, Hardy, I, Grootenboe, P, Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education (S. S. H. N. Y. D. London, Ed.). Singapore: Springer. Knight, J. (2016). How to develop ethical leaders. Retrieved from Abington UK.

3 Leading and Sustaining Communities of Practice

63

Koonce, M., Pijanowski, J. C., Bengtson, E., & Lasater, K. (2019). Principal engagement in the professional development process. NASSP Bulletin, 103(3), 229–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0192636519871614. Lovett, S. (2018). Advocacy for teacher leadership: Opportunity, preparation, support, and pathways. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. McDonald, J. (2014). Community, Domain, Practice: Facilitator catchcry for revitalizing learning and teaching through communities of practice. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resourcecommunity-domain-pr.... McDonald, J., Burch, T., Nagy, J., Star, C., Cox, M., D, Collins, E., & Margetts, F. (2012). Identifying, building and sustaining leadership capacity for communities of practice in Higher Education. Final report. Australian Government Office for learning and teaching. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. Sydney, Australia. Mullen, C. A., & Hutinger, J. L. (2008). The principal’s role in fostering collaborative learning communities through faculty study group development. Theory into Practice, 47(4), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802329136. MySchool. (2020). Retrieved from https://www.myschool.edu.au/. Netolicky, D. (2019). Transformative professional learning: Making a difference in schools. New York: Routledge. Netolicky, D., Andrews, J., & Paterson, C. (2018). Flip the system Australia: What matters in education. New York: Routledge. OECD. (2016). Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/education-ata-glance-2016-indicators.htm. Reaburn, P., & McDonald, J. (2017). Creating and facilitating communities of practice in higher education: Theory to practice in a regional Australian University. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice—Facilitating social learning in higher education. Singapore: Springer. Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA and London: Sage. Saldana, J. B. (2017). Mediating the role of leadership in the development of Communities of Practice. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of Practice: Facilitating social learning in Higher Education (Vol. 2, p. 281321). Singapore: Springer. Shaked, H., & Schechter, C. (2016). Holistic school leadership: Systems thinking as an instructional leadership enabler. NASSP Bulletin, 100(4), 177–202. Victorian Department of Education. (2020). Professional learning communities. Retrieved from https://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/teachers/profdev/Pages/plc.aspx. Watling, C. J., & Lingard, L. (2012). Grounded theory in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 70. Medical Teacher, 34(10), 850–861. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2012.704439. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E. (2009). Social learning capability four essays on innovation and learning in social systems. Wenger-Trayner, B. (2014). World Bank report and recommendations 2010–2014. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/resources/publications/strategic-evaluation-of-network-activities/ Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & de Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/resour ces/publications/evaluation-framework/. Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland, Oregon: CPsquare. Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of Practice: A handbook. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/ https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-pra ctice/. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2020). Learning to make a difference (Vol. 1: Value creation in social learning spaces). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

64

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

Wilhelm, T. (2013). How principals cultivate shared leadership. Educational Leadership, 71(2), 62–66. Wilkinson, J., & Kemmis, S. (2015). Practice Theory: Viewing leadership as leading. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(4), 342–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2014.976928.

Chapter 4

Sustaining Online Teacher Networks Bernadette Mary Mercieca

Abstract The past decade or more has seen the escalation of various forms of social media. With this has come a change in the way many teachers access their professional learning. No longer are they content to accept traditional ways of delivery of professional learning such as conferences or bringing in experts to a school as the only way to learn. One such means that teachers are now accessing is through Twitter and, in particular, Twitter chats. These provide readily available sites where teachers can connect with a global audience and access professional learning suited to their diverse needs. They form what Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) would call a Social Learning Space. There are examples of chats that evolve into sustained Communities of Practice. This chapter reports on the findings of a qualitative study of seven current Twitter chat facilitators. Data analysis suggests that these leaders demonstrate new forms of distributed leadership in the way they facilitate the chats and how they ensure they are relevant and engaging for teachers. They are helping to amplify teacher voice. These findings have implications for Initial Teacher Institutions, schools and policy makers and for envisioning new forms of leadership. Keywords Social media · Networks · Early career teacher · Social Learning Spaces · Mentoring · Sustaining

Introduction I learned more in a year on Twitter than my previous fourteen years in education. (Coleman, Rice, & Wright 2018, p. 57)

This chapter moves to a consideration of Twitter chats, a different type of Community of Practice or Social Learning Space, as articulated in Wenger-Trayner and WengerTrayner’s (2020) most recent book and as was described in Chap. 1. The chats are led by a dedicated band of facilitators who sustain them week in and week out in purely voluntary capacities. Muijs, West, and Ainscow (2010) suggest that leading such networks requires an additional skill set compared with traditional school leadership and highlight the importance of research in this area, “given that most of what we know about management derives from studies of single organisations” (p. 159). The author has been part of these chats for many years and has, at times, hosted particular © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_4

65

66

B. M. Mercieca

sessions. The story of how these chats have evolved and what leadership is needed to ensure their survival forms this chapter. Recent research shows that teachers in the complex and demanding world in which they operate are increasingly turning to social media to fulfil their professional learning needs (Kelly & Antonio, 2016; Lantz-Andersson, Lundin, & Selwyn, 2018; Rosell-Aguilar, 2018). Lantz-Andersson et al. (2018) found in their systematic review of 52 empirical studies of online teacher communities from the early 2000s to the present day that “sustained interaction between teachers online is a key form of professional learning” (p. 304). As Chap. 2 discussed, traditional forms of professional development such as conferences and seminars are largely ineffective in bringing about change at a personal or school level for teachers (Fullan, 2007; Fullan & Quinn, 2016; Oddone, Hughes, & Lupton, 2019). An alternative model of professional learning is advocated in this chapter, one that involves no cost, is easily accessible—it is estimated that 80% of social media is accessed through mobile devices—and open to any teacher who chooses to access it (Rosell-Aguilar, 2018). These teachers include short-term contract and casual relief teachers who are often excluded from school-based collaborative professional development and collaborative networks, such as Communities of Practice (CoPs), and may not have the financial resources to access traditional forms of professional learning such as conferences (Mercieca & Kelly, 2018). The value of these online communities is particularly evident during the COVID-19 lockdown when face-to-face meetings of CoPs are not possible and external professional development opportunities such as conferences are cancelled. They also open to pre-service teachers who have much to learn about the professional world they are hoping to join from more experienced teachers who are more than happy to share their knowledge and expertise.

Social Learning Communities Various forms of social media began to arise in the early twenty-first century and have escalated at an astonishing rate in the last decade. Of these, Twitter, which emerged in 2006 and, to some extent, Facebook, have become the sites that teachers have gravitated to, as opposed to other forms of social media (Coleman et al., 2018). Key educators globally—teachers, trainers and experts in specific fields—have tens of thousands of followers (Rosell-Aguilar, 2018). Twitter is esteemed by teachers as a “valuable conduit for accessing new and relevant educational resources on the internet and also as a viable means of social support for like-minded educators” (Holmes, Preston, Shaw, & Buchanan, 2013). Hart (2020) now lists Twitter as the third most popular tool for personal and professional learning in her Top 200 Tools for 2019 Learning1 surpassed only by YouTube and Google. She describes it as 1 The 2019 Top 200 Tools for 2019 Learning list was compiled by Jane Hart from the results of the 13th annual learning tools survey which were generated from 2,524 votes from 46 countries. It was published on 18 September 2019.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

67

“a prime place for professional social networking, for news and updates, and for use as a backchannel and real-time chats,” while as of the fourth quarter of 2019, Twitter had 152 million monetisable daily active users worldwide (Statista, 2019). No common name exists for the networks that teachers have developed through Twitter. They are known variously as Personal Learning Networks (PLNs) (Tobin, 1998), Social Learning Spaces (SLSs) or networks (Wenger, 2009; Wenger, Trayner, and de Laat, 2011) or Social Network Sites (SNSs) (boyd & Ellison 2007). boyd and Ellison (2007) define SNSs as “web-based services that allow individuals to: (i) construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system; articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection; and (iii) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system” (boyd & Ellison, 2007, p. 122). As discussed in Chap. 1, Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) propose the concept of a Social Learning Space, which may include some of the features of a Community of Practice, but without the expectations of continuity and ongoing commitment. The features they highlight are: • • • • •

The focus is on people and their participation Members drive the learning agenda Learning is rooted in mutual engagement The engagement pushes the participants’ edge of learning Meaning and identity remain central, but based on caring to make a difference rather than competence in a social practice

These features sum up very succinctly the features of the Twitter chats that are discussed later in this chapter. Twitter generally, as with most social media sites, is clearly a network; however, Twitter chats which are online discussions based around a hashtag—a way of specifying subject matter—involve members driving the learning agenda and pushing participants’ edge of learning through the particular educational issues they tackle. Each chat session, which tends to run for one hour, has a particular focus/domain—such as catering for pre-service and early career teachers or teachers in particular subject areas—and the facilitator or their nominated presenter provides a topic each week and a range of prompts for participants to respond to using the hashtag. Particular chats develop particular identities with their membership. Some are very large—as will be seen with #AussieEd—and their members tend to develop a global identity as they interact regularly freely with members from all over Europe or the USA as freely as they would with other staff members co-located at their school. As Holmes et al. (2013) note, teachers who choose to engage with Twitter chats can avail themselves of a “rich, interconnected network of like-minded educators” and be directed to a range of cutting-edge educational materials (p. 63). Others are quite small—such as #IncludeEd, #pstchat and #primarySTEMchat—but more intimate, and members develop an identity based around their domain as they share specific teaching strategies and ideas related to this domain. In most cases, the content arises out of the participants’ own experiences and self-reflection, although in some instances professional reading is provided as a trigger for discussion such as with the #edureading chat. Goodyear, Parker, and Casey (2019) in their analysis of 901

68

B. M. Mercieca

Tweets of Physical Education Teachers in the UK, found that different types of chats suited different types of teacher personalities. While some participants revelled in the very large, fast-flowing chats, other participants found it difficult to navigate them, preferring smaller ones where they could engage at a more personal level. They note the importance of further research on the characteristics, behaviours and the type of professional learning that teachers are accessing, often without their principal or school community being aware of it. A significant feature of online networks that distinguish them from traditional forms of professional learning is that the participants generate their own content rather than relying on formally accredited experts delivering their learning (Prestridge, 2016). Weisberger and Butler (2012) list seven steps that teachers can use to curate content, including finding, selecting, editorialising, arranging, creating, sharing and tracking engagement with it. While not all teachers will go through each of these steps in engaging with Twitter chats, these steps provide a helpful structure for understanding the type of higher order ways that teachers engage with Twitter. The value of this is that it is peer to peer learning that bridges differences of age, race, gender and educational level (Jenkins, 2009). These networks treat teachers as adults who have the power to direct their own learning in what is known as andragogy (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson. 2005). The value of reflective and ongoing professional learning in social media sites is supported by the findings of Darling-Hammond (2017), whose work with high performing education systems throughout the world found that one of the key strategies for improving educational outcomes is to ensure “ongoing learning opportunities for teachers to continually develop and improve their practice and to share their expertise” (p. 3). The advantage of social media sites is that they are free and therefore freely accessible for any teacher, including those with limited resources or living in remote areas. They can be accessed from a variety of internet platforms at any time of the day in what is come to be known as just in time learning (Greenhalgh & Koehler, 2017; Trust, Krutka, & Carpenter, 2016). In addition, both Darling-Hammond (2017) and Britt and Paulus (2016) note the deprivatisation of teaching that is occuring within these networks that allow teachers to reach other teachers not just within their school, neighbourhood and state, but globally. Teachers are no longer bound by the walls of their classroom and, particularly for those with limited collaborative structures in their school, networks provide readily available support and opportunities for learning. Trust’s (2013) study of K-12 teachers in an online course using social media tools found that the teachers turned to their online teachers more than the teachers at their school, even when the course was over. As one of their participants reflected, “[it’s] the breadth and depth of educator expertise out there that I really should tap into…” (p. 9). This is further supported by Oddone et al. (2019) whose participants used their PLN “as a source of inspiration and innovation, updating their practice and introducing new pedagogical approaches” (p. 10). Macià and García’s (2016) extensive review of informal online networks highlighted the importance of them being user-friendly, in the sense of being easy to nagivate, well structured and with appealing content if they are to attract teachers.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

69

They speak of the “collective intelligence” and “shared knowledge” that characterise these networks (p. 292). This is a model of teacher professional development that they call “interactive” as opposed to “craft” and “expert” models, which draw on the teacher’s classroom experiences and the input of experts, respectively. They suggest that the interactive model which involves teachers connecting with external sources and then trying to implement them in the classroom, “is the most complete and takes into account several domains of the teaching situation” (p. 292). These domains include the personal domain of the teacher’s ideas, knowledge and beliefs, the external domain of the information they gain from other teachers and resources, the domain of practice which relates to action research in the classroom and the domain of consequenees that arise from the teacher’s involvement in the SNS. Change in practice at a cognitive and behavioural level is possible, they maintain, through the involvement of teachers in these networks. This is a weighty claim but one that is increasingly being affirmed by other researchers and anecdotally through the reflection of participants within the sites. The latest advances in social media analysis have made it possible to study Twitter chats from a socio-psychology perspective. By using data visualisation tools, it is possible to discover patterns and new knowledge in social networks in ways that would not otherwise be possible (Tsou & Leitner, 2013). A data visualisation of the #AussieEd chat is presented in Fig. 4.1. This visualisation was created by Dr Naomi

Fig. 4.1 Visualisation of #AussieEd chat 5 13 February 2020 Used with permission from Barnes (2020)

70

B. M. Mercieca

Barnes2 by capturing the data through an open-sourced python3 site and then using the tool gephi4 as a directed graph of the social networking that occurred during and after the Twitter chat #AussieEd was scheduled. The directed graph included 665 nodes—representing the number of accounts/people who participated—and 758 edges—representing the number of connections between these accounts/people. What this directed graph shows is firstly that a large number of people participated in this chat—665—either synchronistically on the night or asynchronistically before or after the chat was scheduled. This dual way of accessing the chat is the advantage of formal Twitter chats as will be seen later in this chapter, in that most facilitators save the chat and make it available online for those who missed the chat. Megele (2014) speaks of multilogue—as opposed to dialogue—occurring in these chats where manymany communication occurs: Each message is addressed to more than one potential receiver and may be answered by more than one potential replier. Furthermore, each reply in itself is implicitly addressed to more than one potential receiver and may receive replies from more than one source. This reflects the collaborative nature of Twitter chats and that participants feel comfortable to interact with each other. The directed graph also shows that this was a relatively active chat with 758 connections being made. The inner darkened area indicates that there were key participants in the chat who generated and engaged in a significant part of the discussion. This would have included the facilitator of the chat. However, it is interesting to note that most participants had at least one connection throughout the chat. Those participants who are on the outer edges of the graph would have what Lave and Wenger (1991) would call “legitimate peripheral participation”: Legitimate peripheral participation provides a way to speak about the relations between new comers and old-timers, and about activities, identities, artefacts and communities of knowledge and practice. It concerns the process by which newcomers become part of a Community of Practice. (Lave & Wenger, 1991, p. 29)

They may be new to the chat or may not feel that they are ready yet to actively engage with other participants; however, they can still be influenced and inspired by the chat (Megele, 2014). Current research indicates that Twitter chats have generally been received favourably by educators (Britt & Paulus, 2016; McArthur & White, 2016; RosellAguilar, 2018). The research of Carpenter and Krutka (2015) that involved 494 teachers in the USA found that Twitter chats served a number of different purposes including the sharing of resources, networking and social support. Their participants also found that the chats helped them in “keeping abreast of educational trends” and feeling that they were at the cutting edge of educational thought (p. 718). In their earlier work, Carpenter and Krutka (2014) found that Twitter was a means for teachers to deal with isolation, whether that was created by living in rural or remote 2 Dr

Naomi Barnes is a researcher at Queensland University of Technology (QUT). crawls the social network for a user and exports the results in GEXF format. 4 Gephi is an open-source network analysis and visualisation software package written in Java on the NetBeans platform. 3 crawl_network.py

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

71

areas or by being the only teacher of a specialised subject. As one of their participants reflected, “There’s no one else in my building who is doing the same thing I am” (p. 427). Another noted, “ the networking and emotional support were pretty critical as a beginning teacher going through tough times” (p. 429). As Coleman et al. (2018) reflect, “A website or platform does not make a community, but a community is created by people exploring their domain and pursuing goals together” (p. 90). McArthur and White (2016) make a significant contribution to an understanding of Twitter chats in considering them as “third places” drawing on the work of Oldenburg (1999) and their social media analysis of over 3100 tweets. They define third places as those that are outside a person’s immediate context of their home and workplace. While people might belong to a number of such places, those where they essentially feel at home that are more so than other places are their third places. McArthur and White (2016) were able to draw multiple connections between Oldenburg’s concept and the world of Twitter chats. Oldenburg (1999) outlines seven key features of third places that assist in building up a congenial atmosphere. These include: (i) neutral ground leveller, (ii) conversation, (iii) accessibility and accommodation, (iv) regulars, (v) low profile, (vi) playful mood and (vii) home away from home (p. 22). McArthur and White (2016) found that the neutral ground and having a low profile in a Twitter chat was provided by participants being able to stay anonymous if they chose to and to come in and out of a chat as they pleased, without censure. The leveller element was obvious in the way that the status of participants was not an issue and titles were not used. Those with doctorates or in executive roles interacted on a level playing field with pre-service, early career or casual relief teachers, with experienced teachers tending to advise and support early career and pre-service teachers and the latter building their self confidence in sharing their ideas and hearing from other teachers (Holmes et al., 2013; Macià & García, 2016). Dialogue was clearly a central feature of the Twitter chats whether this be from participants responding to the questions put out by the convenor or engaging with other participants on the side: “The free-flowing nature of these seemingly side (but also central) conversations exemplified Oldenburg’s characteristic of conversation” (McArthur & White, 2016, p. 5) as well as Chap. 6’s understanding of dialogue and reflection. Accessibility and accommodation were ensured by the fact that although Twitter chats have set times the content of the chats is available for participants asynchronously after the event. Regulars were noticeable by their confidence in participating actively in the chat and the more intimate language they used to connect with their friends in the chat. Playfulness flowed on from this, in that regulars felt comfortable enough with their Twitter friends to use more familiar language, emoticons5 or gifs.6 McArthur and White (2016) found that the home away from home element was evident to some extent in those who participated synchronously at the time of the chat but not

5 An emoticon is a representation of a facial expression such as a smile or frown, formed by various

combinations of keyboard characters and used to convey the writer’s feelings or intended tone. 6 A gif stands for Graphics Interchange Format and is in a bitmap format. It allows a Twitter user to

express an idea or feeling visually.

72

B. M. Mercieca

necessarily so much by those who participated asynchronously in the days or weeks following the chat. Twitter chats are a relatively new and a cutting-edge form of social interaction. They attract a diverse range of teachers who access them for a diverse range of needs. This is highlighted in the work of Trust, Krutka, and Carpenter (2016) who found in their study of 732 P-12 teachers in the USA, that while some teachers might have their professional learning needs met in their school communities, not all do and “may turn to PLNs to nurture affective, social, cognitive, and identity aspects of their professional growth” (p. 28). Interestingly, they note that while in any one school there might be only a small percentage of teachers involved with in this way, the influence they can have on other teachers cannot be underestimated. They become what Wenger-Trayner, Wenger-Trayner, Fenton-O’Creevy, Hutchinson, and Kubiak (2014) call “brokers” in a landscape of practice, carrying learning from one learning space to another. This process of cross-fertilisation is illustrated in Fig. 4.2. There are clear benefits for these teachers in bringing learning from one community to another in terms of their professional identity (Mercieca, 2018). Through learning to operate in diverse environments, brokers have the opportunity to develop knowledgeability, which informs their participation in each community (Wenger-Trayner et al., 2014).

Fig. 4.2 Social Learning Spaces (Mercieca, 2018)

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

73

Sustaining Online Communities of Practice Given the benefits of social learning sites such as Twitter, the question arises about how to sustain them. Lantz-Andersson et al. (2018) point to leadership as the key sustaining factor, affirming that “even the most informally developed communities being studied were also found to depend on the sustained efforts of moderators” (p. 11). They note that these guiding roles have in some cases been criticised in terms of an imbalance of power with the other participants. At the same time, they affirm that the role of a moderator or facilitator is a key role warranting further research, which is a goal of this research. Lisboa and Coutinho (2011) suggest that facilitators are important in allowing an online community to thrive. They delineate four key aspects of their role, including “pedagogical, social, technical and administrative” (p. 81). Pedagogically, facilitators need to be informed enough about topics to intelligently lead discussions and moderate contributions from other participants that enhance the collaborative social learning of all. Socially, they need to create an atmosphere where values of mutual respect and trust are evident and where newcomers feel supported and are encouraged to contribute. Further as Ortquist-Ahrens and Torosyan (2008) highlights, the facilitator “plays an essential role in helping to create and sustain not only the structures but also the ethos that can foster genuine community, deep learning, and projects of significance” (p. 4). Technically, they need to be able to operate their virtual environment which might include not only setting up the learning tool, such as Twitter, but archiving chats through other social media. The technical architecture supports the community, while the social architecture enlivens it (Cambridge, Kaplan, & Suter, 2005). Administratively, they need to be well-organised in terms of planning topics, finding co-hosts, advertising the chat and ensuring that they begin and end on time. Without the behind the scenes work that these people do, some chats would tend to not happen or would fade away. Interestingly, Lisboa and Coutinho’s (2011) research with a sample of Portuguese facilitators found that the aspect that these leaders perceived as the most important one for them was an administrative one, with few being aware of the important pedagogical roles they were playing. This research explores the role of facilitators of Twitter chats with the hope that this will provide a clearer understanding of this new form of leadership, one that is mainly concerned with “interactions rather than actions, with capacity building rather than control, with empowerment rather than coercion” (Azorín, Harris, & Jones, 2019, p. 11), underpinned by an ongoing voluntary commitment to teacher learning. From a practical perspective, Britt and Paulus’ (2016) case study of a group of #Edchat participants revealed that the facilitators did a great deal of work to make their chat successful. This included pedagogical efforts to keep the topics relevant and helpful for teachers through being actively involved in social media themselves through educational blogs and their personal learning networks on Twitter. Nicholas, Avram, Chow, and Lupasco’s (2018) study of a language educator’s chat (#CdnELTchat) found that the facilitators valued their leadership role but were aware

74

B. M. Mercieca

of the responsibility that came with it. They enjoyed the sense of belonging to a professional community and as one highlighted, “every single chat was fast, exhilarating and informative” (p. 172). Finally, Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) list a number of features of facilitators within a social learning space including being able to: • Hold the space—being to clarify and reinforce the purpose of community and helping all voices to be heard; • Positive leadership—modelling an approach of inquiry, being supportive and being able to deal with contentious or difficult issues; • Value experience—honouring people’s histories and contexts and always looking for opportunities to shine a light on member’s successes; • Support people to make a difference. (p. 56) These features will be referred to when discussing the findings later in this chapter.

Methodology Similar to the methodology described in Chap. 2, this part of the research was conducted by means of semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews were chosen as they allowed for “maximum flexibility during the interview process” (Carspecken, 1996). In contrast to the participants in Chap. 2, these participants were all interviewed by Skype as they were widely spread geographically and the interviews recorded on a Skype recorder. Lo Iacona, Symonds and Brown (2016) note the value of Skype for researchers as it has the ability to “transend geographical boundaries” (p. 5), while Deakin and Wakefield (2014) reinforce this, noting that otherwise inaccessible participants can be interviewed by means of Skype, thus broadening the scope of a research project. It is possible to create a good research partnership via Skype, as long as the researcher is careful to ensure that a number of conditions are met, such as a good Internet connection, a quiet environment for the interview and the sustained focus of both the participant and the presenter (Seitz, 2016). Data was collected in April and May of 2019. The participants in this phase of the research were purposively chosen as leaders/facilitators of a variety types of Twitter chats drawing on the researcher’s connections in Twitter and online research of Twitter chats. There was an emphasis on chats that had been going for three or more years, although there was one exception to this because of the chat’s innovative focus. Personal contact was made with each potential participant to arrange online interviews. A total of seven leaders from seven different Twitter chats were interviewed. The chats were characterised according to their base/range of outreach and the focus of content as is illustrated in Table 4.1. The interviews were transcribed by one of the researchers. A grounded theory approach, similar to that described in Chap. 2 was used to code the interviews, whereby data sources were read, initially coded and sorted into preliminary categories

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

75

Table 4.1 Twitter chat facilitator summary Topic focus/reach

Local (predominately Aust/NZ)

Global

Broad educational

Hashtag: #aussieED Founders/curator: Brett Salakas Twitter handle:@Mrsalakas Hashtag: #edureading Founder/curator: Steven Kolber Twitter handle: @steve_kolber

Hashtag: #WhatisSchool Founder/curator: Craig Kent Twitter handle: @mrkempnz Hashtag: #edchat Founder/curator: Mark Weston Twitter handle: @shiftparadigm

Focused educational

Hashtag: #includeEdau, (supporting educators in catering for student need and those with differences Co-founder/Curator: Dina Twitter handle: @SnowyKC Hashtag: #pstchat (supporting pre-service and early career teachers) Founder: Stephie Salazar Current curator: Angie Taylor Twitter handle: @Angie8881 Twitter handle: #primarySTEMchat (supporting teachers of Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths in Primary schools) Co-founder: Rachael Lehr Twitter handle: @rachaellehr

in a codebook. This then formed the basis for further reflection and refinement of categories. In keeping with the social nature of Twitter, with the permission of participants, in this chapter will be using facilitator names rather than pseudonyms.

Findings The data analysis demonstrated that the online communities in Twitter functioned as social learning spaces (Wenger, 2009) where facilitators led networks where genuine learning occurred for participants on a regular basis through mutual engagement, commitment and shared enterprise. The story of how these Social Learning Spaces began and the role that the facilitators undertook in ensuring the chats were sustainable over an extended period of time is the focus of this next section.

76

B. M. Mercieca

Ten “Super Passionate” Educators While there are no set of rules or guidelines about how to form a Twitter chat, a number of common features emerged from this study. Most chats began in a small way with a group of interested educators. The pattern was set with the first ever chats, #Edchat, which began in 2009 with a small group of friends in the USA who started a weekly chat session generally discussing education policy and practices (Coleman et al., 2018). As one participant in Britt and Paulus’ (2016) case study of #Edchat reflected, “I learned more in a year on Twitter than my previous fourteen years in education” (p. 57). In a similar way to #Edchat, #aussieED which was set up by Brett Salakas emerged from “ten super passionate educators from all different parts of Australia” who began to tweet using the hashtag, “getting it out there and creating a buzz” (Brett Salakas). Other chats emerged organically from participants finding common ground, their domain, while participating in other chats. Dina Pham, co-founder of #includeEdau, for example, found another teacher sharing an interest in inclusion of students with disabilities or special learning needs while participating in #aussieED. Their extended conversation after the chat finished led to the development of #includeEdau which specifically focuses on how to cater for students with physical and learning disabilities. A similar process happened for Angie Taylor, one of the current moderators of #pstchat, whose friendship with the founder of the chat, Stephanie, and their shared interest in pre-service teachers led to her taking over the chat when Stephanie’s other commitments got too much. Further conversation led to the extension and development of #pstchat which aimed to engage not only preservice teachers, but their mentors in schools and their educators in their pre-service education. It is clear from these examples and others that new chats emerge where there is a perceived gap. For example, Craig Kemp, noting the specific or nationally focused nature of some chats, set up #Whatisschool as a chat that would deal with more general school issues in a broader way across the primary and secondary sectors and globally. Those who began chats also indicated that they had a reasonably long involvement in Twitter and, in particular Twitter chats, before beginning their own. It would be unlikely for someone not previously involved in Twitter to do so. A slightly different approach was taken by Steven Kolber, in setting up the more recent #edureading group. He drew on work of the researchED movement, a grassroots movement of teachers with an interest in research in the UK and surrounds, led by Tom Bennett.7 His plan was to set up an online academic reading group but with some key differences. This is the post he originally sent out in Twitter to garner interest: Alrighty, here’s my pitch: academic reading room type thing, but without the academics. We read one academic article per month (maybe not the Christmas months), maybe #flippedlearning related, maybe not. Then we have a Skype8 chat about the reading and record it. 7 Tom

Bennet is the British researchED founder and editor of the researchED magazine. is a telecommunication application that specialises in providing video chat and voice calls between computers, tablets and mobile devices.

8 Skype

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

77

This eventuated in a small group of educators expressing their interest and the network began with participants reading an article related to teaching practice and learning put forward by Steven and then responding in several different ways to three prompts related to the article. The original idea of using Skype was replaced by the use of the online platform FlipGrid9 where participants were invited to discuss one or more of the three prompts in three minute videos. Other ways of participating were via the #edureading hashtag throughout the month and/or participating in the chat based on the article and the prompts at the end of the month. This group has grown to more than 50 members most of whom are very active participants who are directly working towards making a difference in education by fostering teacher voice and pushing the participants’ edge of learning (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). The group is private and by invitation only and now includes members from the UK and France. Some of the members of this chat group who live in Melbourne, Australia meet faceto-face on a regular basis through TeachMeet, a global grassroots movement where teachers share their ideas in short presentations.

Helping and Mentoring Start-Ups While setting up a Twitter chat is relatively easy to do, fully establishing it in the Twittersphere, attracting a regular body of participants and sustaining it over a period of years is not as easy. For some such as Brett, the process of developing and expanding #aussieED was to make as many connections as he could in networks in the UK, Europe and the USA and get their support: “talking about issues, looking for people, and I would use the hashtag #aussieED.” He also found a mentor in Mark Weston in the USA who purposively spread news about the chat: “He is the man probably most singularly responsible for #aussieED going viral.” This is evident when Mark himself reflected, “I spent a fair amount of time amplifying their tweets, introducing them to people here—I did it before that, and I continue to do it since.” This clearly worked as within the following year the tweet reach of #aussieED on a typical chat night “was actually greater, sometimes, than the population of Australia!” with five or six million tweets reached to date. It is by far the Twitter chat with the largest reach in the whole of Australia and New Zealand and it is not uncommon for the chat to be the number one trending topic on Twitter on its chat night. In order to maintain a high standard of presentation, Brett also engaged in other chats across the globe in order to “cherry-pick the best parts of all the chats” and experimented with different ideas to such as using PowerPoint slides in the chat to assist those from Europe who had a English as second language (ESL) background. Again, this is indicative of a facilitator honouring people’s histories and contexts (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018).

9 Flipgrid

is a social learning platform that allows educators to ask a question, then the students respond in a video. Students are then able to respond to one another, creating a “web” of discussion.

78

B. M. Mercieca

Brett’s example of being mentored by Mark typifies the process of how chats grow organically and in very supportive ways. Facilitators of larger or more longer term chats would appear to be very generous in supporting the development of new chats, supporting people to make a difference (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). As Dinah reflected in relationship to the early days of #includeEdau, “Yes, he (Brett) was with #aussieED and we approached him and asked if we wanted to start a Twitter chat what should we do, what were the requirements. So, he helped us with that.” Clearly the world of Twitter chats is a supportive, collaborative one in contrast to the more competitive world of business. As Brett reflected, “that’s the beautiful, aligned sort of community it is. It’s just a fantastic thing!”

Keeping the Flame Lit It is clear from the previous section, that sustaining the development and growth of a Twitter chat largely rests with the chat leader/facilitator. This is a voluntary and somewhat hidden role, and many chat participants might only be partially aware of the requirements of this role. The role has a number of requirements that help to ensure the viability and continuation of the chat and are shared by most facilitators. These include both operational requirements but also personal qualities and commitments.

Operational Requirements The operational features include all the necessary preparations for ensuring the chat takes place at its regular time and has a good number of participants. These features include:

Planning for the Chat Obviously, the success of a Twitter chat largely rests on how interesting it is to potential participants. Choosing a topic for a chat is a complex matter as participants can range from those coming to the chat for the first time to those who have been part of the chat for a number of years. Although most chats only run for one hour or less per week, fortnight or month, the weeks preceding it can be busy ones for the facilitators. Dinah, for example, talked about how she spends time setting up questions and doing research in regard to special needs children for her #includeEdau chat. As Brett indicated earlier, most chats now use a PowerPoint for the questions/prompts for the chat to support both visual learners and English as Second Language participants. This needs to be set up in advance, with each topic generally requiring four or five

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

79

prompt questions. If there is a guest host, Rachael Lehr, who runs #primarySTEMchat, indicated that she would need to check the prompt questions to ensure they are engaging for participants and she also proofreads the spelling and grammar because, “You know, that reflects on the chat if that’s poor quality.” Staying relevant and engaging a good-sized participant base is important to sustain a chat. Mark indicated that he did this by befriending a Grade 1 teacher whom he talks to when he is planning a chat: And I say to Ellen, what’s happening at your school, what’s happening in your job? And at first, she’ll say, what? Just tell me the stuff that is bothersome for you and eventually I revealed to her – you are a focus group of one!

Mark has never met Ellen face-to-face, but she clearly is a key person in ensuring that the #WhatisSchool chat meets the needs of the teachers who choose to participate in it keeping the input fresh and topical. Craig who also facilitates the #WhatisSchool chat uses a seasonable programme choosing topics that fit with the time of the year: I sort of do a beginning of the year, Southern hemisphere in January and then do the beginning of the year Northern hemisphere in August/September and you kick off things around those. And then we pick certain events throughout the year like cyberbullying – we do a cyberbullying thing. We do gender equality week. We do all those sorts of things.

In Rachael’s situation, because STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) is an ever-changing area, she suggests it is not so difficult to find new topics to discuss in the chat. She also enriches the chat by inviting other educators to be guest hosts: “I get people that are interested in coming on and chatting and I am certainly behind the scenes supporting them in asking questions that would be open, that means the questions are relevant to a range of teachers.” Finding good resources to share with participants during the chat is also a priority for Angie Taylor helping to ensure that her #pstchat pre-service and early career teachers and mentors continue to engage with the chat. Although understandably some topics appeal to some participants and not to some others a chat would need to appeal well to a regular group of participants. This is exactly what Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) meant by “caring to make a difference.” From Brett’s point of view, ensuring relevant and varied topics for #aussieED is sustained by having a team of ten people to work with: And the secret is that it wasn’t a one-off like. It’s not the secret of the success has been it wasn’t just me pushing an agenda. Although, I’ve been very passionate to keep the flame lit during all the time.

As well as helping him to provide an interesting mix of topics for the chats, this team approach ensures the workload for other matters is shared. This will be discussed further in a later section.

80

B. M. Mercieca

Advertising the Chat Advertising for the chat begins about a week before the chat in sending out news about it in Twitter a number of times before the chat, although its content may have been decided weeks in advance. For Craig, the routine goes like this: “So we do the same thing every week. Post it on my blog. We share it out. I use an app called Remind which sends a reminder every week to jump on board.” This is not a difficult task, but a crucial one if a good participant base is to be achieved. From a practical perspective, the chat needs to be moderated each week of the school term, with the facilitator hosting it or finding a guest facilitator. However, as Rachael explained, even if there is a guest facilitator, she still needs to be involved in the chat in the background to support them: “Like if it was the guest hosting a chat I wouldn’t like to be just spiralling there alone.” This is a significant commitment that can take its toll year in year out. As Rachael summarised, “That hour on a Thursday is #primarySTEMchat time. It goes longer than that–it’s usually a few hours but that’s just a commitment I’ve made. For others, they realised that was a big commitment.” The demands of this commitment will be considered further in a later section.

Saving the Chat Most facilitators indicated that the chat was saved in places such as Storify10 or Wakelet.11 This allows those who missed out on the chat to still be involved in seeing the tweets that emerged as well as giving the facilitator analytics about how many participants were involved both synchronously and asynchronously. As Craig indicated, this is a very inclusive procedure, allowing many more participants to be involved. Participants return whenever they wish to over a certain period of time: “The chat archive is always for there for the past two months’ worth of chats” (Craig). These are the basic requirements for keeping a chat running, along with accessing technological support from time to time. But relying just on these requirements will not necessarily ensure a successful and sustainable chat.

Personal Requirements—Building Rapport Beyond the organisational role of the Twitter chat facilitator is their supportive personal qualities and the level of commitment they bring to the role that would appear to play a very significant part in sustaining and developing chats. These qualities will now be considered. 10 Storify is a social network service that lets the user create stories or timelines using social media such as Twitter. 11 Wakelet allows you to save, organise and share content from across the web.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

81

Taking a Genuine Interest in Participants A striking feature of each of the Twitter chat leaders’ interviews was the genuine interest in and care for the participants of their chat that facilitators showed. Typical of the responses was that of Angie, who reflected, “I love to connect people with resources to support them with where they are in their educational journey” or of Brett who indicated, “It’s a labour of love! It’s a labour of love!” Many of the facilitators are practising teachers or have been so in the past, possibly accounting for the personal commitment they bring to this role. Angie went on to discuss how she encourages pre-service teachers to join the chat, when often they are reticent to do so, by listening carefully and helping them to express themselves. She describes her role as a facilitator in the following way: It’s somebody who is nurturing and the ability to listen and support the person who is talking to articulate their ideas and often just when you talk about the way you feel about something and you put it into words to an audience it gives you a chance to rethink what you are thinking. So, either it will either confirm your ideas or it will change them – and you will hear an echo back.

Again, this is evidence of the role of Twitter chats in caring to make a difference (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner 2020). Further, this role of honouring the context of people’s histories and contexts cannot be underestimated. The chats appear to be helping to build the self-efficacy of the pre-service and early career young teachers in finding their voice and being able to clearly articulate their opinions in a supportive, non-judgemental forum.

Building Community Within the Chat: Around the Campfire or Watering Hole Along with taking a genuine interest in participants, facilitators also indicated a variety of ways they helped to build a supportive community within the chat. Dina reflected on the type of considerations she must consider to ensure that the chat is inclusive of all: And it’s just one thing to keep in mind that when you’re chatting with these people you can’t assume that they all come from the same background as you with the same experience. So, you just have to keep that in mind that people work at different sites and they have different experiences than you might.

Because the #includeEdau chat is specifically focused, it is a relatively small chat. However, most participants, Dinah suggested, consider this an advantage as it can be more intimate and allowing new participants to learn how to engage with chats (Goodyear et al., 2019). Steven’s understanding of the community he has created is as “like a campfire or watering hole in Cyberspace.” This is a strong, earthy image that reflects again

82

B. M. Mercieca

the advantage of having a relatively small group of committed participants. It has meant that many have established strong professional relationships and that lively discussions around contentious educational issues have developed over the months since the chat began. Having at least one participant is based in Europe, means this becomes a rich environment for comparing different school systems and ways of operating and effectively illustrates the global connections that social media allows for (Britt & Paulus, 2016). Being able to deal with contentious issues in a constructive manner as Steven does is one of the key qualities of a good facilitator (WengerTrayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). He is passionate about the way the group is helping to give teachers a voice in educational decisions, if only in a small way. An outcome for this group is that a number of its members are now working on producing a journal article about the group so that what is happening there can be shared with a wider community. These strong mutual connections have the potential for sustaining this network over many coming years. Using a different metaphor to describe community building, Mark speaks about Velcro12 moments that arise from the predictable pattern that teachers take when they begin to use Twitter: First, she does a tweet, then a like, a retweet, and a follow, next up is a #hashtag chat, followed by a direct message. Nearly every teacher who reaches this point has a Velcro moment. (Mark)

Just like the hooks of the Velcro that hold together where pressed, so the relationships that can develop through Twitter chats where teachers like, retweet and comment on each other’s posts helps to build mutual engagement and connectivity, key features of a social learning space. Mark suggests that once a teacher experiences a Velcro moment, they will be keen to have that experience again and to help create it for other people. The implications of this are rich. As Mark concluded: The recent experiences of teachers equipped with social media and energized by Velcro moments, point to a way forward to less isolation, better instruction, and higher levels of student learning through connectivity.

Building a Healthy Debate Although a number of facilitators talked about the importance of maintaining a positive atmosphere within the chat; that does not mean that contentious issues cannot be discussed. Rather, the discussion is respectfully conducted. A prime example of this was noted by Steven where the controversial topic of direct instruction was discussed in an early chat in #edureading. Although a diverse range of views arose, all were offered in a spirit of collegiality and the advancement of learning. Being able to manage controversial topics in a constructive way is what Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2018) considers a feature of a positive leadership. The fact that 12 Velcro is a fastener for clothes or other items, consisting of two strips of thin plastic sheet, one covered with tiny loops and the other with tiny flexible hooks, which adhere when pressed together and can be separated when pulled apart.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

83

members are challenged to hear alternative views and to justify their own stances is a sign of a healthy Community of Practice—if all members are agreeing a CoP can become a static, closed community. As Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) note, “there are instances in a Community of Practice where the regime of competence is unchallenged and no longer negotiated—either because it has little need to evolve anymore or because it has been codified in such detail that established practice is all that remains to learn” (p. 21).

Shaping Education Globally The idea of building an online community that might ultimately have an impact in educational decision-making in a global context as Steven suggested, was also expressed by Brett: I feel like I’m pouring in a lot of good energy into #aussieED and really shaping education globally to have a positive impact on education globally. It just baffles me that from my little house to pouring out, chipping away, and doing things. I have had—I can’t tell you how many messages from teachers who were lost and miserable with their profession and downtrodden in their schools and their message to say, “I have found my drive. I have a new passion for education. I was about to quit teaching.

The fact that chats such as these are connected globally means that teachers are engaging with many different perspectives, far beyond the walls of their classrooms (Britt & Paulus, 2016). As Angie reflected, “I think it gives me a chance to really engage with not only people in Australia, and that’s interesting, but looking at education as a whole.” She went on to explain how interesting it is to see that the same issues related to pre-service or initial education are present in other countries. Craig similarly highlighted the global connection: It’s not Sally from the school down the road, you know. It’s genuine people who are doing really good things in their countries and in their schools from all across the world. It’s definitely diverse and it definitely helps having people from so many cultures as well.

He went on to explain how conversations are thought provoking and often continue after the chat has finished through direct messaging. This extended time is important in strengthening the mutual connection and shared ideas of practice. An upshot of being part of a global classroom that Angie noted is that participants can draw on these friendships not only when they attend conferences in different states but if they travel overseas for work or pleasure.

Ensuring They Come Back Again and Again Aside from the direct efforts Twitter chat facilitators take to build up and sustain their communities, there are a number of inherent features of the chat that leaders spoke about that make them appealing places where teachers can engage with colleagues. These features that help to sustain the chats will now be considered.

84

B. M. Mercieca

Twitter, the Great Leveller One of the key themes that emerged from the data in this study was the accessibility and level playing field that is Twitter. Reflecting the ideas of third spaces from McArthur and White (2016), Angie spoke about how the normal positions of authority that exist in a school environment are levelled out in Twitter with no one person being in a more superior position to any other: But I think the other thing is having access–it gets rid of that hierarchy and flattens out the structure. You wouldn’t normally have access to the people you do on Twitter. So, it means pre-service teachers can get advice from a leader of a school or an AP or someone who is a new teacher themselves or somebody perhaps teaching in another country.

This is an appealing social space to be involved in, particularly for early career teachers or casual relief teachers who can feel like they are at the bottom of the pecking order in their school situations. It is also a space where they can feel free to express their opinions and ask questions without fear of censure or the risk of not being asked back for another relief day (Mercieca, 2018). Angie felt that because of this level playing field teachers feel they have got some power and some control. It is also a place where teachers from all different sectors—state, private, Catholic— can come together without any tagging or false status. As Brett explained: “All the different sectors and #aussieED was at the time especially, the only forum where it doesn’t matter. Everyone’s welcome.” An interesting side-note to the level playing field idea is that experts who would normally command a large fee if they were to speak at a conference or seminar, often offer their service for free to Twitter chat groups. Brett spoke of such an expert he was able to organise through his global networks: George Couros13 was hosting a chat. And he charged Sydney Catholic schools about 20 grand,14 or 30 grand or something for the day. And then he did the #aussieED chat that weekend for free.

Brett also spoke of participants who had doctorates mixing with graduate teachers. As he stressed, “People don’t judge you by who you are. They judge you by the quality of the ideas that you present.”

Professional Learning in the Palm of Your Hand Another appealing feature of Twitter that the chat leaders described was its ready availability. Particularly for teachers in rural or remote areas where it is expensive to 13 George

Couros is a leading US educator in the area of innovative leadership, teaching and learning. He has worked with all levels of school—from K-12 as a teacher and technology facilitator, school and district administrator and is the author of the book “The Innovator’s Mindset; Empower Learning, Unleash Talent, and Lead a Culture of Creativity.”. 14 A grand is a colloquial word for $1000.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

85

access professional development in city venues, Twitter provides a free, but valuable alternative. As Angie reflected, it’s “having that professional learning in the palm of your hand on your phone.” Similarly, Rachael spoke about the ease with which professional learning can be accessed: “You can sit and have a glass of wine in your pyjamas and participate in professional learning - that’s a win.” This reflects on the playfulness that Oldenburg (1999) refers to. The relevance of the material that teachers can access in Twitter chats was mentioned by several of the leaders. Particularly chats with very specific domains, such as #includeEdau and #pstchat, can provide teachers with professional learning that is very targeted to their needs. As Trust, Krutka, and Carpenter (2016) highlight in relation to Twitter chats, “PLNs offer new spaces in which teachers may learn and grow as professionals with support from a diverse network of people and resources” (p. 3)

A Very Social Community A number of facilitators spoke about the congenial atmosphere that characterises their chat and keeps participants coming back. Craig noted that with #WhatisSchool, “There are probably tens of people that come back every week just because of the people that are there.” The supportive atmosphere in #aussieED clearly had benefits for a number of participants. As Brett mentioned earlier, it is not uncommon for teachers who are feeling lost and miserable within their school and being close to quitting to find new life and purpose from being involved in these chats. Letting teachers know, particularly early career and casual relief teachers, that their ideas are valued and that there is a supportive community online that they can turn to for advice would seem to be one of the most important roles that these chats can play. As mentioned in Chap. 2, with statistics that say that from 8 to 50% of early career teachers leaving the profession, a place such as Twitter chat that values teachers and supports their ideas cannot be underestimated.

Sustaining the Chat Facilitators As Britt and Paulus (2016) note, facilitators “engage in a great deal of work to make the weekly chats a success” (p. 57). This also was evident in the interviews when the Twitter chat leaders were asked about the challenges of their role. As Brett reflected, “I wouldn’t want to add up how many hours of work I’ve done” or Rachael, “but it’s just such a big job and I’m teaching full time, doing my Masters.” The reality is that being a chat facilitator is a long term, consistently demanding commitment, and having to do it on your own entails a significant investment of time and energy. As mentioned earlier, it is important that chat facilitators have a team of co-facilitators to work with, although as Rachael notes in smaller chat groups this is not always so

86

B. M. Mercieca

viable, “So, really I basically just expect that I will have to do it and if I’ve got some help it’s a bonus.” Angie highlighted the importance of succession planning in terms of upskilling guest hosts: And so, for me it’s that whole idea of getting yourself out of a job really, is that you’ve got to put plans in place so that if you weren’t there, you were sick, if something happened that stuff would continue.

The other consideration is the personal vulnerability that can come from being a chat facilitator. Several facilitators spoke about the problem of inappropriate direct messaging that can sometimes follow a chat, such as getting marriage proposals or propositions: “So I just have to be pro-active with blocking the people that want a wife” (Rachael). Again, the importance of having a team of people to debrief within such situations cannot be underestimated. Finally, despite the heavy workload and the potential vulnerability of the role, all facilitators noted how personally rewarding the role has been for them. Many have gone on to significantly enhance their teaching career and travelled the world because of their involvement. As Mark surmised, “A lot of things have happened, and this has kind of begun identity for them.” However, ultimately it is their personal involvement with the other teachers in their chat that is the most rewarding feature of their role. As Angie reflected, “Having that chat, I feel–as much as people say it takes up so much of your time–is that I get a lot back out of it. Otherwise I wouldn’t do it.”

Conclusions As a social learning space, Twitter chats allow teachers to learn together in a freely available space where they can access relevant educational resources and receive support from a global community. They are the rich, interconnected networks of like-minded educators that Holmes et al. (2013) describe, bridging differences of age, race, gender and educational level (Jenkins, 2009) and allowing teachers to individualise their personal growth and development (Britt & Paulus, 2016). Further, their facilitators clearly know what it means to exercise positive leadership, to honour the experiences of those in their chat and to support teachers to make a real difference in their school environments (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). However, as noted by Muijs et al. (2010), these leadership roles require an additional/different set of qualities than what would be required in leading a school. More research is needed to uncover more about this style of leadership within social media and how these leaders—who give of their time while also often working full time in schools or other educational institutions—can be sustained to effectively continue their work. Developments in these spaces are occurring in terms of the evolution of chats. For example, #edureading members are beginning to share their learning at conferences and in journal publications, while more regular face-to-face connections are also enhancing the social connection of participants as they meet each other at conferences or various forms of unconferences such as TeachMeet. Brett has begun to have

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

87

#aussieED gatherings in Sydney. Although these are geographically specific, they are great events for participants who are available to meet for the first time those that they know online. As Angie reflected, Having something smiling back at you so that when you finally meet them face to face you can recognise them and say, hey I follow you on Twitter. I’ve met some amazing people that way that I wouldn’t have met.

However, despite the many advantages of being part of Twitter chats, as some facilitators noted, only a small percentage of teachers are currently involved in these sites and this can be a source of frustration for engaged teachers when they are the only one in their school who is connected. It is incumbent of Initial Teacher Institutions (ITS) to introduce their pre-service teachers to these professional learning outlets, particularly when many of their students will begin their teaching career as a shortterm contract or casual relief teacher with potentially limited support to develop their practice. School principals also have a role to play in familiarising themselves with the sites, possibly joining in a chat and encouraging their staffs to be involved. The value of a casual or early career teacher being able to ask questions of a principal in a safe space such as a Twitter chat, is substantial. Finally, there is scope for more extensive research on the professional learning that teachers are accessing through social media sites such as Twitter. As was mentioned in Chap. 2, while millions of dollars are being spent in schools to send teachers to conferences and bring in experts to work with their staff, growing numbers of teachers are targeting professional learning through social media that meet their needs. These teachers are the most connected generation of teachers that have ever existed (Trust et al., 2016), and more research is needed to understand why their professional learning in some cases may be better met in online communities than anything else their school or district might be offering. Given that early career teachers have much to gain from being involved in these chats, more research is needed into how they can best be assisted to get involved and what support mechanisms might encourage them to stay involved. There is also scope for exploring if involvement in these groups correlates with ECTs staying in the profession. As Brett indicated earlier in this chapter, anecdotally he has received many messages from discouraged ECTs about to leave the profession, who found a community and developed a new passion for education within the #AussieEd chat that led to them reversing their decision to leave. There are economic as well as social imperatives in this being further researched. Further research might also consider how to better support Twitter chat leaders as they are the lynchpins of Twitter chats. At present, their roles are all purely voluntary universally. There may be scope for regulatory educational facilities to give them some level of funding, in recognition of the valuable work they do in promoting a freely available source of professional learning. Our hope is that these online teacher communities will continue to flourish and increasingly add their voice to educational discourse as well as supporting a growing number of teachers. The profiles of six of the Twitter chat leaders follow on from this chapter.

88

B. M. Mercieca

Key Takeaways • Twitter and, in particular, Twitter chats are a free readily available source of cutting-edge professional learning for all teachers, but of special benefit to early career teachers. • They are social learning spaces characterised by collective intelligence and shared knowledge around a variety of domains and help to amplify teacher voice. • Twitter chat facilitators are highly committed professionals who freely give of their time to ensure that this professional learning can occur in an engaging way.

References Azorín, C., Harris, A., & Jones, M. (2019). Taking a distributed perspective on leading professional learning networks. School Leadership & Management, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434. 2019.1647418. boyd, d, & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101. 2007.00393.x. Britt, V. G., & Paulus, T. (2016). “Beyond the Four walls of my building”: A case study of #Edchat as a community of practice. American Journal of Distance Education, 30(1), 48–59. https://doi. org/10.1080/08923647.2016.1119609. Cambridge, D., Kaplan, S., & Suter, V. (2005). Community of practice design guide. Louisville, CO: EDUCAUSE. Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. (2014). Chat it up: Everything you ever wanted to know about twitter chats but were afraid to ask. Learning & Leading with Technology, 41(5), 10. Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2015). Engagement through microblogging; Educator professional development via Twitter. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 707–728. https://doi. org/DOI10.1080/19415257.2014.939294. Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. New York: Routledge. Coleman, J. M., Rice, M. L., & Wright, V. H. (2018). Educator communities of practice on Twitter. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 16(1), 80–96. Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Empowered educators: How high-performing systems shape teaching quality around the world (1st ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Deakin, H., & Wakefield, K. (2014). Skype interviewing: Reflections of two PhD researchers. Qualitative Research, 14(5), 603–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113488126. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. Journal of Staff Development, 28(3), 35. Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts and systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Goodyear, V. A., Parker, M., & Casey, A. (2019). Social media and teacher professional learning communities. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 24(5), 421–433. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 17408989.2019.1617263. Greenhalgh, S. P., & Koehler, M. J. (2017). 28 days later: Twitter hashtags as “Just in Time” teacher professional development. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 61(3), 273–281. Gruzd, A., Wellman, B., & Takhteyev, Y. (2011). Imagining twitter as an imagined community. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(10), 1294–1318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211409378. Hart, J. (2020). Top tools 4 learning. Retrieved from https://www.toptools4learning.com/jane-hart/. Holmes, K., Preston, G., Shaw, K., & Buchanan, R. (2013). “Follow” me: Networked professional learning for teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(12).

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

89

Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge: MIT Press. Kelly, N., & Antonio, A. (2016). Teacher peer support in social network sites. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.02.007. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E., & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The Definitive classic in adult education and human resource development. Boston: Taylor & Francis. Lantz-Andersson, A., Lundin, M., & Selwyn, N. (2018). Twenty years of online teacher communities: A systematic review of formally-organized and informally-developed professional learning groups. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 302–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018. 07.008. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimated peripheral participation. United States of America: Cambridge University Press. Lisboa, E. S., & Coutinho, C. P. (2011). E-moderation in a thematic sample of orkut virtual communities: Challenges and opportunities. In L. G. Chova, D. M. Belenguer, & A. L. Martinez (Eds.), Edulearn11: 3rd international conference on education and new learning technologies (pp. 6081–6089). Lo Iacono, V., Symonds P., & Brown DHK. (2016). Skype as a tool for qualitative research interviews. Sociological Research Online, 21(2), 103–117. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.3952. Macià, M., & García, I. (2016). Informal online communities and networks as a source of teacher professional development: A review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 291–307. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.021/. McArthur, J. A., & White, A. F. (2016). Twitter chats as third places: Conceptualizing a digital gathering site. Social Media + Society, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116665857. Megele, C. (2014). Theorizing Twitter chat. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practic, 2(2), 46–51. Mercieca, B. (2018). Companions on the journey: An exploration of the value of Communities of Practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia and New Zealand (Doctor of Philosophy). University of Southern Queensland. Retrieved from https://epr ints.usq.edu.au/34618/. Mercieca, B., & Kelly, N. (2018). Early career teacher peer support through private groups in social media. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1359866X.2017.1312282. Muijs, D., West, M., & Ainscow, M. (2010). Why network? Theoretical perspectives on networking. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/092434509 03569692. Nicholas, B., Avram, A., Chow, J., & Lupasco, S. (2018). Building a community of connected ELT professionals on Twitter. TESL Canada Journal, 35(2), 166–178. Oddone, K., Hughes, H., & Lupton, M. (2019). Teachers as connected professionals: A model to support professional learning through personal learning networks. The International Review of Research in Opena and Distributed Learning, 20(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v20i4.4082. Oldenburg, R. (1999). The great good Place: Cafes, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons and other hangouts at the heart of a community. Da Capo Press. Ortquist-Ahrens, L., & Torosyan, R. (2008). The role of the facilitator in faculty learning comunities: Paving the way for growth, productivity, and collegiality. Learning Communities Journal, 1(1), 1–34. Prestridge, S. (2016). Conceptualising self-generating online teacher professional development. Rosell-Aguilar, F. (2018). Twitter: A professional development and community of practice tool for teachers. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5334/jim e.452. Seitz, S. (2016). Pixilated partnerships, overcoming obstacles in qualitative interviews via Skype: A research note. Qualitative Research, 16(2), 229–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879411557 7011. Statista. (2019). Number of monthly active Twitter users worldwide from 1st quarter 2010 to 1st quarter 2019 (in millions). Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/282087/numberof-monthly-active-twitter-users/.

90

B. M. Mercieca

Tobin, D. R. (1998). Building your personal learning network. http://www.tobincls.com/learningn etwork.htm. Trust, T. (2013). Beyond school walls: Teachers’ use of professional learning networks to receive help on a global scale. International Journal of Social Media and Interactive Learning Environments, 1, 270–286. Trust, T., Krutka, D. G., & Carpenter, J. P. (2016). “Together we are better”: Professional learning networks for teachers. Computers & Education, 102, 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu. 2016.06.007. Tsou, M.-H., & Leitner, M. (2013). Visualization of social media: Seeing a mirage or a message? Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 40(2), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/152 30406.2013.776754. Weisberger, C., & Butler, S. (2012). Re-envisioning modern pedagogy: Educators as curators. Presentation given at SXSWedu. http://goo.gl/xpg4W. Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of practice: A handbook. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/ https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-pra ctice/. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2020). Learning to make a difference (Vol. 1: Value creation in social learning spaces). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wenger-Trayner, E., Wenger-Trayner, B., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Hutchinson, S., & Kubiak, C. (2014). Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning: Abingdon: Routledge. Wenger, E. (2009). Social learning capability four essays on innovation and learning in social systems. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & de Laat, M. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/resour ces/publications/evaluation-framework/.

Online Twitter Chat Leader: Brett Salakas #AussieED

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

91

Brett Salakas is a self-described teacher/speaker/poet/author as well as an accredited Google Certified Innovator who currently teaches in a State primary school in Sydney, NSW. He is the founder of the earliest Twitter chat and currently the largest Twitter chat in Australia, #AussieED. This had its origins in 2013 when Brett began to explore online options for professional development in his school. Twitter had first emerged globally in 2006 but did not really explode into the social media world until 2009 (Gruzd, Wellman, & Takhteyev, 2011). Brett drew on the development of the USA-based #edchat on Twitter as a basis for setting up his own Twitter chat in Australia. AussieED had a slow start initially. As Brett, explained, “I used the hashtag aussieED for about three months before the first person responded.” His alternative plan to get things going was to set up a very basic chat with teachers from his own and several local schools related to the new English syllabus in NSW. During the course of a normal staff meeting at his own school, he demonstrated how the chat worked. This got a few more teachers involved who then participated in a Google Hangout with him. He ended up forming a team of about ten people who became the backbone of AussieED with the first chat occurring in March 2014, largely with the team of ten as participants. After that, according to Brett, “It just went gangbusters!” In the five years since the Sunday 8.30 pm (AEST) chats began, thousands, indeed millions of educators have participated to greater and lesser extents. He now has a global audience that includes early risers in Europe and the USA. The chat often ends up being the top trend in Australia on a Sunday evening and often in the UK and USA as well. Over time, Brett and his team experimented in various ways. For example, to cater for participants from non-English-speaking countries, they started to use images with the chat questions. The team stayed connected with edchat and other chats that began to develop and literally, “cherry-picked the best parts of all the chats.” Aussie Ed is a success story that is possibly not very widely known.

92

B. M. Mercieca

Online Twitter Chat Leader: Rachael Lehr #PrimarySTEMChat

Rachael is a passionate primary Science specialist and Digital Technology teacher. She is an Ambassador for Seesaw (a digital portfolio site for schools), an Apple Teacher, “Girls in Stem” Club member and Administer of #PrimarySTEMChat. The chat site has been running for more than two years and focuses primarily on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) for teachers. Two years ago, Rachael and her co-founder felt that there was a lot of confusion about what STEM was and how to implement it, particularly in primary schools. Rachael had attended a STEMx academy the year before, a weeklong professional learning experience for primary and secondary school science teachers, which was a key stimulus for setting up the chat. Although the title of the chat hashtag refers to primary teachers, Rachael stresses that many secondary teachers are also involved, as well as those in administration, higher education and STEM consultants. #PrimaryStemChat runs for an hour on Thursday evenings at 7.30 pm (AEST) for most weeks of the year. Rachael shares the administration of the chat with her co-host, easing the pressure of such a demanding schedule. Although initially having an Australian audience, this chat now has regular participants from Singapore, the UK, Europe, and the USA. Like IncludeEd, Primary Stem Chat is a relatively small chat compared with some, drawing around 45 participants per night. But as Rachael indicates, between 200 and 500 tweets can arise from the chat and the following week linked to the hashtag. This is a niche chat site that is making an amazing contribution to an understanding of STEM in schools.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

93

Online Twitter Chat Leader: Craig Kemp #Whatisschool

Craig is a New Zealand born educator with over 14 years of experience both in the classroom, in leadership and in consulting. He is a keynote speaker, workshop host and global education consultant, who works with departments, ministries, school leadership, school communities and educators to understand, design and implement digital learning solutions and transformations to improve teaching practice and student learning outcomes. Craig is well known for his dedication to education through Social Media, with over 41,000 followers on Twitter. He is an Apple Professional Learning Specialist (one of only 20 + in Asia), Apple Teacher, Google Certified Educator (Level 1 & 2), Google Certified Innovator, Common Sense Certified Educator, SeeSaw Ambassador and has a Bachelor of Teaching and Learning and a Post-Graduate Diploma in Educational Leadership and Administration. Craig is the co-founder and moderator of the trending Twitter edchat #whatisschool. This chat arose in 2013 at a time when Craig felt there was “a bit of a gap market” in terms of providing a more inclusive sort of chat that was not region, grade level or subject-specific. The chat focuses on broad questions such as, “What is school all about? What are the things that make us tick? What are things that excite us?” The chat runs every week through most weeks of the year, attracting 50 to 100 educators each week. Approximately 60% of participants are from North America, Europe and Asia, with the remainder from Australia and New Zealand. It is 7 pm every Thursday evening in Eastern time in the USA; for Singapore 7 am Friday and for Australia it’s either 9 or 10 am, depending on the time zone. In esssence it is every Friday morning for Craig and many of his participants. As Craig explained, “It’s genuine people who are doing really good things in their countries and in their

94

B. M. Mercieca

schools from all across the world. It’s definitely diverse and it definitely helps having people from so many cultures as well.” The #WhatisSchool chats are archived which allows educators who have not been free at the time of the chat to access the tweets that occur. This archive on a platform called Participate is available for two months after the chat has occurred. Craig largely single-handedly runs this chat and has been doing so since its inception, providing professional learning for educators all over the world. This is truly a commendable achievement.

Online Twitter Chat Leader: Dina Pham #includeEdau

Dina is a primary and secondary school educator who is currently the International Students’ Program Manager at an Australian high school where she teaches Vietnamese and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). She is passionate about inclusion and aims to promote empathy, understanding and awareness within her classrooms. Over her nine years of teaching, Dina has worked with students from a variety of different cultural and ethnic backgrounds, as well as socioeconomic statuses. This has given her a broad range of experiences and knowledge to draw on as a co-leader of the Twitter chat #includeEdu. IncludeEdau began in 2015, arising out of a chat between Dina and her co-host who were participating in #AussieED. They decided to take the topic they were

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

95

chatting about a bit further and focus on inclusion. This process of a larger chat sponsoring/supporting a new chat would appear to be a common way for new chats to develop. Although #includeEdau has a strong Australian cohort, Dina stressed that there were participants from all over the world, particularly from the UK but also North America. The chat is held at 7 pm on a Sunday evening once a month—the second Sunday of each monthallowing participants to continue on to #Aussie Ed at 8.30 pm should they wish to. Because of its more specialised focus, the chat attracts a smaller cohort than some other chats, but this is not necessarily a disadvantage, with a deeper, more intimate and connected experience being offered to participants (Megele, 2014). However, as Dina is quick to point out, all teachers, both primary and secondary, have students with disabilities in their classes and a chat like this can provide valuable information and awareness raising about different physical disabilities and learning difficulties students might encounter with their learning. Reference Megele, C. (2014). Theorizing Twitter chat. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practic, 2(2), 46–51.

Online Twitter Chat Leaders Steven Kolber #edureading

Steven Kolber is a High School English, History, Literacy and EAL (English as an Additional Language) teacher from Melbourne, Australia. He presents Instructional Video, Flipped Learning, inclusion and educational research applications to teaching. He is the founder and leader of #edureading, an academic reading group around key education topics and is committed to improving educational practices across the world.

96

B. M. Mercieca

Steven is passionate about education at the local and policy level and is keen to engage teachers in educational research to improve student outcomes and professional practice. This later aim gave rise to the #edureading group which focuses on educational research. Steven was finding that he only intermittently engaged with academic reading once he had completed his Masters’s study. The #edureading group provided a more focused approach to academic reading in a collaborative context. The participants in the group include teachers, administrators and academics. The group has a unique structure in providing participants with academic reading, the chance to present their ideas in a FlipGrid video and the culmination of discussion in a chat session on the last Sunday of the month at 7.30 pm. Steven initially chose most of the articles for discussion, but more recently articles have been used that were suggested by participants. A series of three or four prompts are used to guide the reading and are later used in the Twitter chat. The FlipGrid format allows participants to asynchronously post their thoughts on the reading—in a 3 min timeslot—or engage with others who have posted videos. The day before the chat, Steven takes the videos that have been submitted on FlipGrid and edits them together, including the participants’ Twitter handle so other participants can ask them questions about their videos. As Steven reflects, this creates a Twitter chat that is a little deeper than the relative surface level that can occur in some Twitter chats. The diversity of the group and the longer form of asynchronous discussion means that there is space for genuine disagreement and discussion. #Edureading is a private chat group that you need to be invited into. Its participants are largely Australian, but there is increasing involvement from European participants. Although this is a relatively new chat group compared with the others, its novel approach and the passion with which Steven guides it suggests that this will be a group that will continue to make an impact in the Twittersphere.

4 Sustaining Online Teacher Networks

97

Online Twitter Chat Leader: Angie Taylor #pstchat

Angie is the current facilitator of #pstchat (pre-service teachers’ chat). This chat was originally founded by Stephanie Salazar who had started connecting online with other pre-service teachers as she was finishing off her teaching degree. As Stephanie’s teaching commitments grew, she asked Angie to take over from her at the end of 2017. Angie jumped at the idea, knowing she had been well supported during the early years of teaching and wanting to give back “to pre-service teachers and to our profession in a personal way.” The chat site has now been running for four years and caters for a range of teachers including pre-service teachers, early career teachers and their mentors and administrators. In comparison with some other chats this is a fairly small chat—although over a 24-hour period it can have an account reach of 22,000 and 102,000 impressions—but that is its beauty in that it can be a more intimate, nurturing environment for those participants who are often fairly new to Twitter. They have the opportunity to present their ideas about education without fear of getting it wrong. Angie now shares some of the moderation of the chat with a young teacher in Victoria, John Wigg, which gives her a bit more flexibility. The chat runs on Tuesdays at 7.30 pm AEST throughout the school terms. This is a big commitment for Angie but one where she still continues to enjoy the privileged position, she has in being able to provide an avenue for beginning teachers and their mentors to share information and get advice on questions they might have.

Chapter 5

The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education Laura Thomas , Melissa Tuytens, Geert Devos, and Ruben Vanderlinde

Abstract Globally, large numbers of early career teachers (ECTs) drop out of the profession in the first years of practice. This chapter reports about Flemish research focusing on the role of collegial support networks in keeping ECTs in the profession, using mixed-methods social network analysis. Links to Communities of Practice— as the central theme of this book—are made, and recommendations towards ECTs, their colleagues, mentors, school leaders, policy makers, teacher education colleges and pedagogical advisory services are formulated. Keywords Primary school teams · Early career teachers · Collegial support networks · Mixed-Methods social network analysis

The research project Problem statement and central concept “Your team, your colleagues, really make or break your experience of the job.” (see Thomas, Tuytens, Devos, Kelchtermans, & Vanderlinde, 2019a) The first years in the teaching profession are characterised as challenging and demanding (Feiman-Nemser, 2001). Early career teachers (ECTs) are confronted with numerous challenges (Veenman, 1984), leading to a rollercoaster of feelings and emotions (Mansfield, Beltman, & Price, 2014). In addition to expanding their teaching knowledge, skills and abilities, ECTs also develop their self-image as a teacher and adjust to the culture of the school (Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Kessels, 2010). Around the world, the intensive nature of these first years in the profession has led to large numbers of ECTs dropping out. In Flanders (Belgium), for example, current drop-out rates indicate that 14% of primary school teachers and 22% of secondary teachers leave the profession within the first five years (Flemish Department of Education and Training, 2013). In Australia, the attrition rate is even estimated to reach 50% (Gallant & Riley, 2017). Teacher characteristics, such as job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment, intrinsic motivation to teach and self-efficacy, have been found to be important factors influencing teachers’ decision to leave versus remain (Struyve, Vandecandelaere, Meredith, Hannes, K., & De Fraine, © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_5

99

100

L. Thomas et al.

2016; Wang, Hall, & Rahimi, 2015). In turn, receiving support from colleagues in teachers’ first years of teaching is found to be particularly important in influencing these teacher characteristics and keeping teachers in the profession (Mastenbroek, Jaarsma, Scherpbier, van Beukelen, & Demerouti, 2014; Struyve et al., 2016). The importance of collegial support for ECTs is also illustrated in the quote from one of the published studies on the research that is discussed in this chapter at the beginning of this introductory part. In what follows, the central concepts used in the research that is the topic of this chapter are further discussed below. This quote was originally used in the following published article: Thomas, Tuytens, Devos, Kelchtermans, & Vanderlinde, (2019a)

Teacher characteristics as important precursors of retention Teacher characteristics, such as job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment, intrinsic motivation to teach, and self-efficacy have been found to be important precursors of retention (e.g., Wang, Hall, & Rahimi, 2015). The first three teacher characteristics are also conceptualised as job attitudes, which can be defined as beliefs, feelings and thoughts concerning the organisation and the profession (George & Jones, 1999). First, job satisfaction, is described as teachers’ affective responses to the extent to which their expectations and the reality of teaching overlap (Carmeli & Weisberg, 2006). Many studies have demonstrated the power of job satisfaction for ECTs to thrive in the profession (e.g., Struyve et al., 2016). The second teacher characteristic, affective organisational commitment, concerns being emotionally involved in and having feelings of identification with the school (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Previous research from Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, and Topolnytsky (2002) found that affective commitment is positively related to employees’ intentions to remain in the profession. The third teacher characteristic is intrinsic motivation to teach and is defined as teachers teaching as they take pleasure in the activity of the teaching profession (Soenens, Sierens, Vansteenkiste, Dochy, & Goossens, 2012). Former research has revealed that intrinsic motivation is coupled with less intent for employees to leave the job (Richer, Blanchard, & Vallerand, 2002; Vansteenkiste et al., 2007). The final teacher characteristic, self -efficacy, concerns teachers’ belief in their capabilities to generate student learning and success (Bandura, 1997; Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Steca, 2003). Previous studies have found that positively perceiving one’s own teaching abilities encourages teachers to remain in the job (e.g., Wang et al., 2015).

Collegial Support In turn, several scholars (Struyve et al., 2016; Thoonen, Sleegers, Oort, Peetsma, & Geijsel, 2011) have suggested that support from colleagues as well as support from

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

101

school leaders can influence the job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment, intrinsic motivation to teach and self-efficacy of teachers and as such prevent them from dropping out of the profession. Moreover, research has shown that school leaders can play a role in strengthening support among colleagues in the team (Hulpia, Devos, & Rosseel, 2009). In this respect, both the support from the principal as well as support from colleagues have been included as a focus in the project. The European Commission (2010) argues that in ECTs’ (collegial) relationships, three types of support are essential. First, professional support guides teachers in their professional growth, and assists them in developing appropriate skills and competencies (European Commission, 2010). This may involve providing advice about class management, discipline, didactics and teaching practices (Veenman, 1984). Second, emotional support helps ECTs dealing with their emotions, stress, motivation and self-confidence, and is essential in overcoming the praxis shock (European Commission, 2010; Gold, 1996; Papatraianou & Le Cornu, 2014). Third, social support helps ECTs to become part of the team and getting familiar with the school culture (European Commission, 2010), for example, by updating them about written and unwritten school rules (Papatraianou & Le Cornu, 2014).

The Social Network Perspective Previous studies, however, have investigated ECTs’ collegial support using generalised measurements, such as single survey items or composite Likert scales to indicate how teachers perceive the support they receive from colleagues (for example, an item such as “My colleagues assist me in acquiring the knowledge, skills and strategies to be successful in the classroom” (Stockard & Lehman, 2004). Even though studies using this approach are valuable, they are limited as they only ask teachers to rate the support, but do not report on differences in the support ECTs receive (e.g., regarding the frequency and/or quality of the support), nor do they shed light on the diversity of the content for which support is provided from their colleagues. Moreover, these instruments do not investigate to what degree ECTs actually have access to collegial support. Pertaining to this issue, several scholars (e.g., Baker-Doyle, 2012; Fox & Wilson, 2015) have put forward the use of a social network perspective, which provides the opportunity to research collegial support in a more nuanced way than merely a simple rating of the support. Using the social network perspective to investigate ECTs’ collegial support, support is regarded as a resource available in ECTs’ interactions with their colleagues (Borgatti, Brass, & Halgin, 2014); and a collegial support network is the set of relationships wherein this support may be exchanged (Daly, 2010). In using a social network perspective, a variety of network aspects can be investigated. In this project we paid attention to (1) network size, frequency of support and perceived usefulness, (2) network structure and network content and (3) network changes. First, network size is defined as the number of colleagues who support the ECT, frequency of support is the level of intensity of support acquired by ECTs,

102

L. Thomas et al.

and perceived usefulness refers to the quality of support. Based on previous literature (Ingersoll & Strong, 2011; Joiner & Edwards, 2008), in this project it is hypothesised that these network aspects are linked to retention and its precursors. Network size, for example, has been found to reflect teachers’ chances for obtaining resources (Struyve et al., 2016) such as support, and in studies on formal induction programmes, more comprehensive and intensive support is linked to support being more effective (Ingersoll & Strong, 2011). Moreover, Joiner and Edwards (2008) stipulated that teacher retention is influenced by the level of quality of the support ECTs receive. Second, the focus is put on network structure and network content. In this project, network structure is about the patterns of teachers’ relationships. Mapping and measuring these patterns reveal the degree to which interactions between people, and as such a transfer of resources, such as support, can occur (Van Waes et al., 2016). In this respect, previous studies found that network structure can play a role in (precursors of) retention (e.g., job satisfaction) (e.g., Ibarra & Andrews, 1993). Additionally, people’s perceptions on the network were also studied, as these can reveal the underlying processes through which the network structure emerges (Crossley, 2010), and are necessary to explain the effects of network structure on (the precursors of) teacher retention (Crossley, 2010). Next to network structure, the content of the network also appears to be important in the context of teacher induction. Particularly, starting from the seminal work of Veenman (1984) revealing the most frequently perceived challenges for which ECTs need support, in this project the content of the collegial support networks is unravelled and related to teacher retention and its precursors. Third, network changes are also investigated. Specifically, for enabling an enquiry of the effect of support networks on outcomes related to retention, the changes in networks over time as well as the reasons for these changes should be investigated (Emirbayer & Goodwin, 1994; Sasovova, Mehra, Borgatti, & Schippers, 2010). To enable a focus on this variety of network aspects, exploring networks using different types of data and analysis techniques is valuable. In this respect, a social network perspective offers a wide array of possibilities with respect to research approaches, methods and designs (see 2.1) (Borgatti, Everett, & Johnson, 2013). However, until now, network studies have often only used one approach, one method and one design. The present project aimed to contribute to the above-mentioned needs by exploring ECTs’ collegial support using a social network perspective. By using a social network perspective whereby a variety of network aspects—instead of only one—is investigated, this project aimed to provide a more nuanced understanding of the social side of teachers’ first years in the job and obtain a better understanding of which conditions are related to the precursors of retention. Additionally, by combining multiple network approaches, methods and designs, this project aimed to move beyond the often exclusive focus on quantity and network structure which is inherent to previous studies inside and outside of the educational field (Crossley, 2010).

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

103

Research Context Before diving into the study’s specific research objectives, it is important to situate the research within its unique context. To grasp the specific situation of ECTs in the context of Flemish education, an interesting approach is to first take a broader view and examine the organisation of teachers’ first years in the profession in other countries and regions. Around the world, teacher induction programmes have been implemented to support ECTs at the start of their career. Based on Eurydice data and information from members of the cluster “Teachers and Trainers,” in 2010, the European Commission Directorate-general for Education and Culture reported that in Europe these induction programmes vary greatly in how they are organised. In some countries, such as Estonia, Cyprus and Portugal, induction is aimed at ECTs who have successfully graduated from the initial teacher education (have a relevant qualification) and have obtained their licence or permission to teach. In other countries, such as Germany, Austria and the UK, induction is organised for teachers who already obtained their qualification but have not yet required their licence. In this specific case, the teachers in question are often called “probationary teachers,” “trainees” or “candidates,” and the induction phase concludes with a formal assessment of their skills and abilities to decide whether or not they can officially enter the job. A third group of countries (e.g., France and Luxembourg) aims its induction programmes at teachers who have not yet earned their qualification or license. In these countries, boundaries between initial teacher education and induction are rather fluid. Finally, in a large number of European countries, such as Belgium, Slovakia and Finland, a state-wide induction system is non-existent. Yet, the non-existence of a coherent system-wide induction programme aside, many of these countries have implemented separate formal support measures, such as classroom observations (e.g., Slovakia), support with lesson planning (e.g., Malta), and compulsory professional trainings (e.g., Estonia). At the time of the study, Flanders (the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium), however, did not offer a coherent system-wide induction programme, nor did they provide any formal support measures or resources for schools to implement induction initiatives (European Commission, 2013). The school boards of all Flemish publicly financed schools have been granted autonomy in organising and implementing teacher induction initiatives (European Commission, 2013). In practice, most school boards decentralise the responsibility of the organisation of induction to the individual schools (OECD, 2014). From 2007 until 2010, official mentoring hours were introduced by the decree on teacher education of 15 December 2006. Experienced teachers or other school team members could be exempted from a part of their tasks to support ECTs (Saveyn, 2006). By means of the implementation of these mentoring hours, for the first time, induction support was explicitly included in the legislation. Despite its positive effects, in 2010 the additional funding was revoked because of savings measures, and schools again became the main responsible for supporting their ECTs (Devos & Tuytens, 2013; März, Kelchtermans, & Dumay, 2016). Nowadays, in schools that still invest in mentoring, these initiatives are mostly isolated, rather than integrated in nature (Ballet et al., 2011).

104

L. Thomas et al.

To further grasp the ECTs’ situation in Flanders, it is also important to explain the different career stages they pass in their first years in the profession and how they move from one stage to another. When ECTs start their career, they are at first given a temporary position of definite duration, which covers an appointment of maximum one school year. This appointment can be renewed after this year, and this is the decision of individual school boards. After a minimum of three school years (and at least 720 days of teaching)1 within the same school network, temporary ECTs reach a new type of appointment, namely a temporary appointment of continuous duration (a so called “tenure-track position”) (Flemish Department of Education and Training, 2003). During the first three years, schools are not obligated to evaluate teachers with a temporary appointment in a formal way, and when the contract is discontinued before teachers have a tenure-track position, this does not have to be preceded by a formal performance evaluation. Teacher evaluation policy only requires that every teacher who has an appointment of at least 104 days in a school receives a job description including the tasks they have to carry out and how they have to carry out these tasks, and asks from schools that they evaluate all their teachers (both early career and experienced) every four years (Flemish Department of Education and Training, 2009). The absence of formal induction initiatives for early career teachers—who before they receive a temporary appointment of continuous duration have zero job security— underlines the importance of day-to-day collegial support (Marable & Raimondi, 2007) in the Flemish context. Moreover, Tickle (2000) argues that formal induction programmes such as mentoring and professional development workshops and seminars are valuable, yet do not guarantee that ECTs will fully exploit these opportunities, nor will they automatically lead to changes in ECTs’ learning environment. In this respect, several scholars plea for induction as a school-wide responsibility, wherein ECTs can count on their colleagues for help for a diverse range of challenges they are struggling with (Feiman-Nemser, 2001; Hargreaves & Fullan, 2000; Papatraianou & Le Cornu, 2014; Struyve et al., 2016). The current research is focused on further unravelling this collegial network of ECTs by addressing teachers’ first years in the profession from an innovative theoretical and methodological approach, grounded in the social network perspective. The specific research objectives are further outlined below.

1 According to the new CAO (‘Collectieve arbeidsovereenkomst’), from September 1, 2019 onwards

teachers are now able to get a temporary appointment of continuous duration after a minimum of 580 days, spread over a minimum of two school years within the same school network (see Omzendbrief PERS/2018/03).

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

105

Research Objectives The project’s main aim was to gain insight into ECTs’ collegial support networks and the extent to which this is related to job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment, intrinsic motivation to teach, and self-efficacy as precursors of retention. As research taking a social network perspective on teachers’ first years in the profession is still in its infancy, in all these studies we focused on primary school teams as these are less ambiguous than school teams in, for example, secondary education (which consists of multiple networks, such as departmental networks, grade networks and campus networks). Based on the variety of network aspects that we aimed to study, the central aim was divided into three Research Objectives (ROs). These ROs have been tackled throughout five empirical studies and are visualised in Fig. 5.1. Study 1 and 2 are both related to RO1 representing a focus on the network aspects “network size, frequency of support and perceived usefulness.” In Study 2, aside from the relationship between ECTs’ collegial support networks and the precursors of teacher retention, the role of the school leader is also included. Furthermore, Study 3 and 4 are linked to RO2, referring to the network aspects “network structure and network content.” Finally, Study 5 refers to RO3 where the network aspect “network change” is put forward. Even though it is not the main focus of this research, we also believe that by paying attention to the different network aspects of primary school teams’ network, we can also contribute to unravelling the underlying network structure of these primary school teams as Communities of Practices (CoPs). A CoP can be defined as a group of people sharing a common passion who interact regularly to explore this passion, share ideas and together improve their practice (Mercieca, 2017; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). According to this definition, primary school teams can be seen as CoPs. Primary school teams are a group of people sharing a passion for the teaching profession whom by interacting with one another—and in these interactions share their ideas, knowledge and support—learn to improve their teaching and class

Fig. 5.1 Overview of the Project

106

L. Thomas et al.

experiences (Wenger, 2011). More specifically, primary school teams seem to meet the key criteria of CoPs, as primary school team members have a shared competence and commitment to offer high-quality education to their students, build up collaborative and supportive relationships with one another, and develop a shared practice consisting of shared experiences, strategies and techniques (Wenger, 2011). Interestingly, CoPs offer a perspective to look beyond the formal structures of organisations and teams. Rather they focus on the informal learning that comes with interrelations between team members. Specifically, previous research has stipulated that in CoPs less experienced members learn via the real-life context in which they are situated and through the relationships they have with their colleagues (Lave & Wenger, 1991). At the same time, and as articulated in Chapter 2, their more experienced counterparts have the opportunity to develop skills such as supporting their colleagues and disseminating their ideas and practices. In this respect, by focusing on the underlying structure of the web of relationships in teacher teams as CoPs we aim to extend current CoP literature. In particular, this project can provide insights into beneficial features of the web of interrelationships (i.e. network size, frequency, usefulness, content, structure and change) in CoPs facilitating members’ learning processes and more specifically promoting professional, emotional and social collegial support. Regarding the different methodologies necessary to focus on the variety of network aspects that we put forward, in the first two studies we have made use of an ego network approach, quantitative methods and one measurement. In Study 3 and 4, we have employed both ego- and whole-network approaches, quantitative and qualitative methods and one measurement. Finally, in Study 5, both approaches and methods were used, however here we utilised a follow-up design, considering the dynamics of networks. These different approaches, methods and designs are discussed in more detail in the next section.

Social Network Methodology To enable a nuanced understanding of ECTs’ collegial support networks and their link to the precursors of teacher retention, the social network perspective was used. In this section, we aim to provide a short introduction to this perspective and the methodological toolbox we used. Subsequently, we present the two data collections that were used throughout the project.

The Social Network Perspective Social networks are a way of perceiving social systems wherein emphasis is put on the web of relationships surrounding actors (Van Waes, 2017). In the social network perspective, the unit of analysis is the relationships between individuals (Borgatti, Brass, & Halgin, 2014). The motive for its increasing use is that to understand social phenomena, not only individual characteristics, but also the web of ties between individuals is necessary (Daly, 2010).

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

107

Network Research Approaches In social network research, two approaches can be distinguished, a whole-network and an ego network approach (Borgatti et al., 2013). Whole-network research investigates the ties between all pairs of nodes in a group. An example is the examination of the ties in a school team between all of its staff members. In a whole-network approach, researchers can analyse features on (1) the whole-network level (e.g., cohesion; the extent to which individuals in a network are connected to each other; Burt, 2000), (2) the node level (e.g., centrality; the extent to which a person has a central network position; Burt, 2000) and (3) the dyad/triad level (e.g., reciprocity of relationships) (Crossley et al., 2015). Ego-network research studies focal actors (egos) and the set of ego’s ties with (and sometimes also between) others (alters). An example is the investigation of ECTs, their professional contacts and the relationships between them. Both approaches have their merits; the whole-network approach gains insight into the overall system’s perspective, and the ego network approach provides an indepth picture of the individual (Moolenaar, 2012; Van Waes et al., 2016). Until now, limited research on teacher induction has complemented both approaches (Kilduff & Krackhardt, 1994). To fill this gap, this project explores both the ego network approach (Study 1 and 2) and attempts at using the ego- and whole-network approach concurrently (Study 3, 4 and 5).

Network Research Methods Notwithstanding the interdisciplinary roots of social network analysis (Bristol, Brown, & Esnard, 2014), in the past decades, the quantitative method has received most attention (Edwards, 2010). Using quantitative methods, the patterns of relationships that make up the network structure can be investigated from an outsider view (Crossley et al., 2015). Particularly, the quantitative SNA has the ability to identify the patterns of networks by mapping and measuring the ties between people (Edwards, 2010), and as such enables insight in an individual’s access to the network’s resources (Burt, 2000). Qualitative methods can take an insider view and focus on the people’s perceptions of the network and its content. Through people’s network stories, their subjective views of the meaning of ties can be investigated (Crossley et al., 2015). Apart from the quantitative and qualitative network methods being valuable in their own respects, combining both in a mixed-method study could yield additional insights (Baker-Doyle, 2012). Qualitative network data can build upon objective numerical data and in this way avoid simplification of the complex reality of networks. For example, the inclusion of network stories can help researchers uncover the underlying processes through which network structure emerges (Crossley, 2010). In turn, quantitative measures can give an overview of the entire network, instead of the subjective interpretations of one of its members. However, mixed-method research

108

L. Thomas et al.

investigating ECTs’ networks are scarce. By using quantitative methods (Study 1 and 2) and combining these with qualitative methods (Study 3, 4 and 5), this project has aimed to enable the investigation of a variety of network aspects.

One Measurement Moment or Follow-up Design Researchers can study networks in a design consisting of one or multiple measurements. Research regarding the latter are scarce. This scarcity is striking, as networks are inherently dynamic, and by taking different measurements into account, the evolvement of networks can be investigated (Kilduff & Tsai, 2003). Moreover, research investigating the processes through which network changes emerge are particularly sparse. Specifically, while in the last decade considerable developments have taken place regarding the statistical analyses of the dynamics of networks, there has been no comparable growth with respect to qualitative follow-up methods (Edwards, 2010). However, the strength of mixing methods also applies to network dynamics (Crossley, 2010). Through network stories, the processes influencing network changes (e.g., creating a tie because they need the other person’s expertise) can be revealed (Coviello, 2005). To fill this gap, in Study 5, a follow-up mixed-method study was conducted.

Data Collection To meet the project’s research objectives, two main data collections were undertaken. In May 2016, a first data collection took place. All Flemish teacher education colleges offering a degree in primary education were asked to forward an online survey to their graduates of 2015. Non-responders were sent a reminder e-mail. In total, 292 firstyear primary school teachers responded to the online survey. Next to biographical information and questions regarding their academic and career trajectory, the participants were questioned about the precursors of teacher retention and their support networks. For the precursors of teacher retention, previously validated instruments were used to measure job satisfaction (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Steca, 2003), intrinsic motivation to teach (Soenens et al., 2012), affective organisational commitment (McInerney, Ganotice, King, Marsh, & Morin, 2015), and self-efficacy (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). For the network part of the questionnaire, an ego network approach was utilised, where we focused on the professional, emotional and social support the ECT (ego) received from his/her colleagues (alters). Specifically, in a first step, the ECTs were asked name generator questions: “From which of your colleagues do you receive professional/emotional/social support?” In a second step, additional information regarding these colleagues and the ECT’s relationship with them was collected via name interpreter questions. The ECTs were asked to specify the gender and educational experience of their colleagues as well

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

109

as the frequency (varies from 1 = “once every three months” to 5 = “daily”) and perceived usefulness (varies from 1 = “never useful” to 5 = “always useful”) of the support they receive from them. Finally, the ECTs were also asked about their school leader; participants had to fill out a validated scale from Hulpia et al. (2009), measuring the extent to which their school leaders are transformational. Transformational school leaders are regarded as leaders that aim to build their school’s capacity, want to support the advancement of quality of teaching and learning (Hallinger, 2003), and focus on teachers’ motivation and commitment (Leithwood, 1992). A transformational leader offers individualised support to teachers, stimulates them intellectually which motivates open communication in the team (Paffen, 2011), and works bottom-up in order to bridge the individual actions of teachers and the collection action of the school (Leithwood, 1992; Leithwood, Leonard, & Sharratt, 1998). A second data collection was conducted in the school year 2016–2017. Ten ECTs and their primary school teams participated in this study. Where in the first data collection, ECTs refer to those teachers who have been working for a maximum of one year, in this second data collection ECTs are teachers with maximum five years’ experience. The motivation for limiting the scope of the first data collection to teachers in their first year after graduation is twofold: (1) to avoid the generalisation of results for heterogeneous groups of ECTs, and (2) to elucidate ECTs’ earliest teaching experiences. The former refers to the idea that in the first years of teaching teachers grow tremendously (Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002), meaning that teachers with five years’ experience are very diverse from teachers with three-years’ experience or teachers in the first year after graduation (see Clotfelder, Ladd, & Vigdor, 2007; Kane, Rockoff, & Staiger, 2008). However, for pragmatic reasons, in the second data collection, the definition of ECTs was broadened to teachers with a maximum of five years of experience. This second data collection was aimed at teachers teaching in a school during an entire school year. However, teachers in their first year after graduation seldom have such-like assignment. In this respect, our inclusion criteria for ECTs were broadened. The primary school teams that participated were rather small in team (10–19 members) and school size (79–170). All schools were public (as is true for almost all schools in Flanders), with four urban and four rural schools. Both the ECTs and all other primary school team members were questioned three times (T1 in December, T2 in March and T3 in June) via three research instruments. First, and using a whole-network approach, all primary school team members were requested to fill in a social network questionnaire to unravel the work-related relations in the team. Specifically, they were asked to indicate with whom from their colleagues at the school they had contact for work-related issues (in the form of, for example, advice, collaboration, work-related talks) within the last three months. To non-responders, reminder e-mails were sent out. In Fig. 5.2, an example of one of the school networks is visualised. Next, the participating ECTs were asked to fill out the scales for precursors of teacher retention (see first data collection) and requested to participate in a semi-structured interview. In these interviews, in which an ego network approach was used, the ECTs were questioned about the processes behind their relations with their team members, the content of these relations and the link between these relations and the precursors of teacher retention.

110

L. Thomas et al.

Fig. 5.2 One of the school networks in the sample; The circles (also called “nodes”) in the visualisation represent the primary school team members, and the ties show who these team members have nominated as work-related contacts. The nodes are sized according to betweenness, which is a centrality measure in social network analysis. Specifically, this means that the larger the node, the more that person can be regarded as having a central position in the team (he/she often lies on paths between other team members)

Regarding ethics, in every step of both data collections, participants were requested to fill out informed consents. In these informed consents they were asked to approve that they have been fully informed about the study, agree to participate and can stop their participation at any time, and give consent for the use of the information they provide in the study. Regarding the latter they were assured that their real names and other personal data would never be communicated in the study’s output (i.e., feedback reports, academic work). Moreover, precautions were also taken with respect to the specific ethical nature of social network data. In the second data collection, the ECTs were asked about their collegial relationships in the team via an ego network approach (as was stated in the previous paragraph). More specifically, we showed them whom they had nominated as work-related contacts in the whole-school survey and visualised this in an ego network (see Fig. 5.3 for an example of this visualisation). We did not opt to show them a visualisation of their school network and their position in this network, as this could harm the ECTs in the case they noticed, for example, that not many of their colleagues nominated them as work-related colleagues (Korir, Mittelmeier, & Rienties, 2019). In this respect, by only showing part of the data, we aimed to avoid potentially harming the ECTs on the one hand and breaching the team members’ answers to the survey on the other.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

111

Fig. 5.3 One of the ego networks in the sample (anonymised); The ECT is placed in the centre, and the concentric circles represent the degree of usefulness of the contact with their colleagues. Between brackets, the frequency of the work-related contact with their colleagues was also indicated. This visualisation of ego networks was based on Hogan, Carrasco, and Wellman (2007) and Van Waes et al. (2015)

Main Findings Network Size, Frequency of Support and Perceived Usefulness (RO1) In Study 1 and 2, we dealt with RO1; the exploration of ECTs’ collegial support networks—in terms of network size, frequency of support and perceived usefulness— and their relationship with important precursors of teacher retention. Both studies made use of the first data collection consisting of online surveys from 292 first-year primary school teachers.

112

L. Thomas et al.

Study 1 In Study 1,2 first, SNA showed that ECTs received professional, emotional and social support from on average six colleagues (i.e., network size), on a weekly basis (i.e., frequency of support), and that they assessed this support as useful most of the time (i.e., perceived usefulness). Second, regression analyses were used for the exploration of the extent to which these network characteristics were related to the precursors of retention. For network size, the results showed that the number of colleagues supporting the ECT, is positively related to the extent to which ECTs are satisfied, committed and intrinsically motivated. Furthermore, regarding the characteristic frequency of support, the findings revealed insignificant relationships with the precursors of retention. In contrast, “perceived usefulness,” was positively related to job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment and intrinsic motivation to teach. Finally, the relation between network size and perceived usefulness on the one hand, and self-efficacy on the other appeared to be non-significant in the models of emotional and social support. For professional support, perceived usefulness was significant, but demonstrated only a small, explained variance. Based on Bandura (1977), we hypothesised that teachers’ self-efficacy might stay constant even when teachers receive professional support from colleagues, as long as the support does not bring about successful teaching experiences. Taken together, our results indicated that high-quality support from a number of colleagues is important for ECTs’ job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment and intrinsic motivation to teach. In line with Feiman-Nemser (2001), we emphasised ECTs’ support to be a responsibility of the entire team. A concluding hypothesis was that school leaders could play a role in encouraging the team to be willing to offer support. This brings us to Study 2 in which this theory was put to the test.

Study 2 Specifically, Study 23 built on the previous study by investigating the interplay between transformational school leadership—and the variables included in Study 1—using the same data set. For feasibility purposes, in this study and all subsequent studies our focus was put on professional collegial support only. Furthermore, because of the embeddedness of the interplay in the Job-Demands Resources (JDR) model (Bakker & Demerouti, 2007)—which was the leading framework in this study—self-efficacy was no longer included as an outcome variable, but as a mediator. 2 The

original published article on which this summary is based and in which the results can be consulted in detail: Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Moolenaar, N., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019b). Teachers’ first year in the profession: The power of high-quality support. Teachers and Teaching, 25(2), 160–188. 3 The original published article on which this summary is based and in which the results can be consulted in detail: Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020a). Transformational school leadership as a key factor for teachers’ job attitudes during their first year in the profession. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48 (1), 106–132.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

113

The other teacher characteristics, namely job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment and intrinsic motivation to teach, were henceforth conceptualised as job attitudes (Lachman & Aranya, 1986; Struyve et al., 2016). The interplay between the variables under study was tested using path analysis. The findings revealed that the more first-year teachers perceive their principal to be a transformational school leader, the more ECTs are intrinsically motivated to teach, feel affectively committed to their school, and are satisfied with the job. Second, the findings showed that transformational school leaders also have an indirect relationship with teachers’ job attitudes, via the number of colleagues supporting the ECTs. This means that the higher ECTs’ perception of the principal as a transformational school leader, the higher the number of colleagues reported by the ECTs as providers of professional support, and in turn, the higher ECTs’ scores on the job attitudes. Finally, the results suggest that transformational school leaders are able to increase teachers’ motivation and satisfaction partly by elevating their belief in their competences. Regarding the latter, however, the explained variance in self-efficacy was low, implying that transformational school leadership of the principal is positively related to teachers’ beliefs in their abilities, but that a number of other factors (e.g., successful teaching experiences) are also important in this matter.

Network Structure and Network Content (RO2) In Study 3 and 4, and based on the second data collection, we tackled RO2 aimed at exploring the relationship between network structure and content and ECTs’ job attitudes.

Study 3 In Study 3,4 the relationship between the collegial network structure of ECTs’ primary school team and their job attitudes was explored using a mixed-method design. The assumption guiding this study was that the network structure, reflecting ECTs’ access to the network’s resources, is positively related to their job attitudes (e.g., Struyve et al., 2016). First, descriptive SNA of the whole-school survey was used to operationalise the network structure of the primary school team in measures of cohesion and centrality. Next, the scores on the job attitude scales were analysed descriptively, and were, by visually inspecting the quantitative results, compared to their cohesion and centrality scores. The findings showed that various cases seemed to show support in favour of accepting the guiding assumption; several ECTs had 4 The

original published chapter on which this summary is based and in which the results can be consulted in detail: Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020b). Unpacking beginning teachers’ collegial network structure. A mixed-method social network study. In D. Froehlich, M. Rehm, & B. Rienties (Eds.), Mixed methods Social Network Analysis: Theories and Methodologies in Learning and Education. London: Routledge.

114

L. Thomas et al.

an interconnected team, and a central position in this team, and as such had access to professional support to a great extent. Additionally, these teachers indicated to be satisfied with the job, affectively committed to the school, and intrinsically motivated to teach. Other cases, however, rather seemed to show support in favour of rejecting the guiding assumption. In these cases, ECTs had a less interconnected team and/or did not have a central position, yet they had high job attitude scores. Second, using the interview data, teachers’ perceptions on the network and relationships were investigated to unravel the processes through which network structure emerges. In line with previous research (Cross, Parker, & Borgatti, 2002), the results revealed several processes influencing centrality and cohesion. For example, the findings showed that (in)accessibility of colleagues plays a role. Only when colleagues are accessible and willing to help, work-related ties are actually present. Moreover, the results suggest that it is also important for ECTs themselves to actively engage in contact with their colleagues if they want to receive support. Additionally, they profit from having relational knowledge. The latter refers to the result that when ECTs have knowledge on the location of expertise in the team, they can interact with those colleagues that can help them tackle experienced challenges. Finally, the findings showed that when ECTs are afraid of being considered incapable when asking for help, or when they are physically isolated in the team, they have a less central network position. Furthermore, the results also shed light on the relationship between network structure and ECTs’ job attitudes. The ECTs stated that how you experience the job and school is partly determined by the team, their interconnectedness and whether or not they are supported. The qualitative data also shed light on the cases wherein the assumption seemed to be incorrect. In the case of one of the ECTs, for example, the qualitative results revealed that her lower centrality scores were explained by her part-time and supportive position in the school. However, knowing that her colleagues would help her if needed and having confidence that contact with them would increase as the year progressed, positively affected her job attitudes.

Study 4 In Study 4,5 we zoomed in on the content of ECTs’ relationships. The cases of two ECTs (i.e., the ECTs with the highest and lowest job attitude scores) were discussed by investigating to what extent the structural and content-related aspects of the collegial networks are related to their job attitudes. First, the analyses of the whole-school surveys were analysed to enable an exploration of the network structure in cohesion and centrality measures, reflecting ECTs’ access to support. The findings revealed that both school networks were highly interconnected, with a slight advantage for the school network of the ECT with the highest job attitudes. The analysis also showed 5 The

original published article on which this summary is based and in which the results can be consulted in detail: Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G. Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019a). Beginning teachers’ professional support: A mixed methods social network study. Teaching and Teacher education, 83, 134–147.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

115

that the latter had a more central position than the ECT with the lowest job attitude scores, meaning that she had more professional connections in the team. Comparable with results from, e.g., Hopkins and Spillane (2014), the interviews suggested that principals are facilitators of a supportive culture and can influence the team’s interconnectedness by providing an inviting staffroom. However, the main focus of Study 4 was on the content of their collegial support. Specifically, the content was explored based on the most commonly perceived challenges encountered by ECTs (see Veenman, 1984). The results indicated that both teachers received support for a variety of these challenges, with a slight advantage for the ECT with the highest job attitude scores. Specifically, the latter received support for classroom management and discipline, dealing with individual differences, instructional and assessment strategies, communication with parents, organisation of class work, teaching materials and dealing with problems of individual pupils. The ECT with the lowest job attitude scores also mentioned support for most of these issues, however an indication of support regarding class management and discipline was not found. Additionally, this support was limited in terms of frequency and number of colleagues offering the support. Previous studies have argued that this might cause poorer information and induce a lack of teacher development (e.g., Van Waes, Van den Bossche, Moolenaar, De Maeyer, & Van Petegem, 2015). Furthermore, in comparing the cases of both ECTs, the results showed that the extent to which they have access to professional support seems to depend on the interplay between the ECT and their colleagues. The ECT with the highest job attitude scores had relational knowledge, i.e., she knew what other team members knew (Cross et al., 2002), and acted on this knowledge in that she actively and purposefully shaped her network (i.e., “network intentionality,” Moolenaar et al., 2014). Moreover, her network intentionality seemed to be strengthened by the school’s supportive culture, wherein her colleagues were accessible and helpful. The ECT with the lowest job attitude scores did not always signify her need for help. Apart from that, her inhibition to connect was fuelled by some colleagues’ inaccessibility. Finally, via the interview data it was investigated how the network structure of the school team and ECTs’ network content is related to their job attitudes. The results suggested that receiving support for a variety of challenges from a diverse number of colleagues is positively related to ECTs’ job attitudes. These results stipulated that induction support should not be limited to one mentor, but be provided by a variety of colleagues, and that ECTs need support for various challenges.

116

L. Thomas et al.

Network Change (RO3) Study 5 In Study 5,6 we dealt with RO3 focusing on network change. This final study focused on (1) exploring to what extent, in what ways and for which reasons the network (position) of ECTs changed throughout the school year, and (2) how the network (position) of ECTs influenced their job attitudes over time. For this study, all data collected throughout the school year 2016–2017 from 5 selected ECTs is used. First, to explore ECTs’ network position, the whole-school surveys from the primary school teams of these five ECTs were analysed in terms of ECTs’ centrality. In the interviews with the ECTs, their position was further explored. The results revealed that for some ECTs their network position (slightly) increased or decreased over time. The out-degree of one of the ECTs, for example, which is a centrality measure that reports about the proportion of colleagues she nominated as work-related contacts, increased at T2. This was explained by the negative encounter with her principal, which first led to the team members supporting her emotionally, and eventually resulted in the ECT seeking out her colleagues for work issues. Second, at the ego network level, descriptive statistics of network dynamics (i.e., network size, and the number of new, lost and kept ties) were calculated. Next, based on the analyses of the interview data, the reasons for the formation, loss and retention of ties were explored. The findings showed that some ECTs’ networks remained stable, whereas others clearly showed change. In correspondence with previous studies (e.g., Van Waes, Van den Bossche, Moolenaar, Stes, & Van Petegem, 2015b) the results demonstrated several reasons for tie formation and change. ECTs formed ties with colleagues whose classroom was nearby (physical proximity), colleagues whom they trust, and colleagues who have similar views on didactics and pedagogy (homophily). The results also revealed that the school leader is someone they approach when they face difficult issues (hierarchy), such as difficult conversations with parents. Furthermore, (lack of) necessity, and lack of time because of working part-time at a school have been revealed as inhibiting factors for tie formation. Finally, in line with Study 4, the findings suggested that ECTs’ network intentionality as well as the accessibility of their colleagues are important, and can be facilitated by, for example, an inviting staffroom and collaborative culture. Third, by analysing the interview data, the relationship between the networks and job attitudes over time was explored. The study’s findings seemed to confirm previous research (e.g., Fox & Wilson, 2015) wherein the importance of being professionally connected and supported for teachers’ job attitudes are stipulated. Additionally, the results suggested that ECTs’ collegial network and the professional support they receive can also act as a buffer or mitigating factor when ECTs are faced with difficulties. Specifically, collegial support seems to be 6 The

original published article on which this summary is based and in which the results can be consulted in detail: Thomas, L., Rienties, B., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020c). Unpacking the dynamics of collegial networks in relation to beginning teachers’ job attitudes. Research Papers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1736614.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

117

able to prevent a negative incident to lead to a dramatic decrease in how teachers feel and think about the job and school.

General Discussion Induction Support as a School-Wide Responsibility The findings in this project align with several scholars’ appeal to consider help for ECTs as a school-wide responsibility wherein the entire team takes ownership of induction support (Feiman-Nemser, 2001). “Schoolwide” in this sense indicates that the organisation of induction support is an activity that is not only carried out by one mentor but also one that requires help from other key players such as their colleagues and school leaders. Throughout the studies, receiving support from multiple colleagues appeared to play an important role for ECTs. In Study 1 and 2, network size was significantly related to ECTs’ job attitudes, and in Study 4, the ECT with the highest job attitudes had a more central network position than the ECT with the lowest job attitudes. A highly individualistic culture, wherein teachers work within the confines of their classroom (Little, 1990) is simply not sustainable if ECTs are to develop as effective professionals. More specifically, the support of a network of colleagues for ECTs embedded in a CoP is important for, for example, learning to deal with the professional tasks and responsibilities they are expected to master (Willis, Crosswell, Morrison, Gibson, & Ryan, 2017), increase teachers’ confidence in their teaching skills and developing an identity as an educational professional (see Chapter 2; Morrison, 2013). Moreover, the results of Study 5 suggested that when ECTs experience challenges, support from colleagues can operate as a mitigating factor and in this sense prevent dramatic decreases in their job attitudes. This finding is hopeful because it suggests that even though ECTs are confronted with a number of challenges, support from colleagues can make the difference in their experiences (Kelchtermans & Ballet, 2002). An important notion is that the quality of this collegial support matters. In the first two studies quality was measured using the degree to which ECTs experience the support from their colleagues as useful. A more evaluative focus of the quality of teacher interactions which has its roots in research on CoPs is the Value Creation Framework by Wenger and de Laat (2011). Following network research from Van Waes et al. (2016), the framework could have provided insight into the specific value produced by teachers’ ties. Specifically, the Value Creation Framework states that six cycles of value creation are possible: (1) Immediate value refers to interactions that are considered valuable in themselves (e.g., venting); (2) Potential value concerns resources that are not immediately drawn upon, but which are considered valuable for later; (3) Applied value describes interactions which have led to applying changes to one’s teaching practice (but not necessarily cause improvements); (4) Realised

118

L. Thomas et al.

value refers to interactions consisting of suggestions or ideas that actually lead to improvements in the teacher’s practice; (5) Reframing value points to interactions that cause teachers to rethink certain teacher methods or practices and (6) Aspirational value refers to interactions towards which the teacher has future aspirations regarding its value. In future research, the value creation framework could be used to pinpoint the quality of ECTs’ collegial interactions. Next to the importance of quality of collegial interactions, however, an important question is also how ECTs can get access to this support in their first years in the profession?

ECTs’ Access to Professional Support The findings in this project underline that ECTs’ tendency to actively approach their colleagues for support (“network intentionality or agency”; see Moolenaar et al., 2014) is important in shaping effective support networks. These findings align with Fox and Wilson (2015), who argued that the way ECTs move through the network determines in part their access to support. When ECTs are aware of their network and have relational knowledge, they can actively shape their network (de Laat & Schreurs, 2013). As such, after reviewing the project’s findings regarding ECTs, we believe that they cannot be regarded as passive actors that simply “undergo” the first years of teaching. In developing their teaching practice and their self-image as a teacher, and in adjusting to the climate of the school, some ECTs are proactive in obtaining the necessary resources. These teachers build social capital through networking or put differently, by actively forming relationships with others (Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004; Fox & Wilson, 2015). The project’s findings further suggested that ECTs’ network agency can be supported or inhibited by the accessibility of their team members. Study 4 and 5 suggested that even though ECTs have control over relationship building for obtaining social capital, this control and, in other words, responsibility to act can be supported or constrained by their colleagues. This accords with Fox and Wilson (2015), who stated that in building ties between individuals, both parties have to take steps towards one another. In turn, the findings seemed to suggest that the interplay between ECTs’ agency in shaping their support network and the accessibility of their team members is affected by the structural and cultural reality of the school (Kelchtermans, 2017). Although team members themselves can exert openness to answer questions from their beginning colleagues, they also need opportunities to be accessible. In this respect, the project found several inhibiting factors for ECTs to access support. When ECTs are isolated from their colleagues, for example, this constrains both them and their colleagues from actively approaching one another. Furthermore, the results in Study 4 revealed that ECTs’ network agency can be further strengthened by a supportive culture wherein colleagues are open to questions and eager to collaborate. This is also related to what Johnson and Kardos (2004) call an “integrated professional culture.” In this type of culture, ECTs can easily approach their colleagues, and their colleagues are open to discussing their experiences with them (Gaikhorst, Beishuizen, Korstjens,

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

119

& Volman, 2014). In the renowned work of Hargreaves and Fullan (2012), it is even stipulated that the presence or absence of a supportive school culture plays a crucial role in ECTs’ decision to stay or leave a school. School leaders seem to play a key role in the school’s structure and culture.

The Power of School Leaders’ Transformational Abilities The project’s findings showed that school leaders play an important role in ECTs’ job attitudes. Specifically, in Study 2, the path analysis showed a direct positive path from transformational leadership to all three job attitudes. Additionally, in Study 5, the case of one of the ECTs demonstrated that negative feedback from the principal can negatively influence ECTs’ job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation to teach. These results demonstrate that the school leader is an important factor in teachers’ first years in the profession. S/he is often the first person the ECT meets when entering the school and ECTs’ relationship with the school leader has previously been found to exert an important influence on their decision to stay in or leave the profession (Gallant & Riley, 2017). In addition to suggesting school leaders’ role in ECTs’ job attitudes in a direct way, the project’s results suggested that school leaders’ transformational abilities are also related to ECTs’ job attitudes in an indirect way. Specifically, in Study 2, the findings revealed that the more ECTs perceive their school leader as a transformational leader, the more colleagues are mentioned by the ECTs as providers of professional support and, in turn, the higher the ECTs’ job attitude scores. Put differently, these findings suggested that school leaders can be regarded as facilitators of a supportive team. These results were further strengthened by the findings of Study 3, 4 and 5 wherein the ECTs stipulated the pivotal role of school leaders because they considered them as being able to create a supportive school climate. For school leaders, it is difficult to support every (early career) teacher individually. However, by creating the conditions necessary for, and stimulating teachers to collaborate and support one another, school leaders can create a professional learning environment wherein, via a sense of collective responsibility, both early career and experienced teachers can develop further with the ultimate aim of school improvement (Stoll, Bolam, McMahon, Wallace and Thomas, 2006; Vanblaere & Devos, 2016). Collective responsibility among teachers is necessary to ensure that teachers look beyond their classroom walls. When teachers are concerned not only with their own practice but also with the teaching practices of their colleagues, meaningful support among them will arise (Hargreaves, 2007). This is also related to one of the important roles of effective leadership described by Fullan (2015). In this work, it is described that teams benefit from school leaders who are lead learners. Lead learners are leaders who establish a safe, collaborative and supportive learning environment in which they themselves act as learners and work together with teachers to organise highquality education instead of working top-down. Not only will the teachers in the team open their doors for one another, but research from Fullan also shows that these collaborative cultures have a powerful effect on student learning.

120

L. Thomas et al.

Links with Communities of Practice As mentioned before in the section on research objectives, in this chapter we consider networks as the underlying relationship patterns of CoPs. In CoPs, members learn through their relationships with one another. More specifically, the seminal work of Lave and Wenger (1991) describes that a process of situated learning takes place; people learn through their ties with co-workers and through the environment in which they are situated. The learning has a social nature or put differently develops through regular dialogue with their colleagues (Mercieca, 2018). Based on this work, networks and CoPs cannot be viewed as separate structures, but rather as “integral aspects of the social fabric of learning” (Wenger, Trayner & de Laat, 2011, p. 8). In this respect, a network is defined as the web of interrelationships through which resources (e.g., knowledge, information, support) are exchanged, and CoPs refer to a collective aim to learn about a specific domain and improve practice. Even though some groups can be viewed as networks OR CoPs, most groups are a combination of both (Wenger et al., 2011). The groups that are the topic of this chapter, for example, namely primary school teams, are CoPs involving a web of interrelationships between teachers and other school team members. These interrelationships have developed and endure because the primary school team members are striving to develop collective knowledge and improve school quality. In the primary school teams that were considered in this research, there were no formal CoPs. However, we can consider these teams as organic CoPs which have evolved through team members sharing resources without formally engaging with institutional leadership for support (see Chapter 2). Specifically, the partnership between the team members is informal and the flows of knowledge, information and support through their relationships is relevant as they have a shared commitment to advance the knowledge of the team regarding teaching, didactics and other education-related issues (Wenger et al., 2011). In the forthcoming book Learning to Make a Difference: Volume I Value Creation in social learning spaces from Wenger-Trayner and Wenger-Trayner (2020) these informal groups are called “social learning spaces,” and are defined as groups in which the focus is on people and their participation, learning is rooted in mutual engagement and social learning happens through interactions such as having productive conversations and sharing practices and tips with colleagues. The present research revealed which network aspects are important for ECTs to have access to resources in the network—namely collegial support. As in this research networks are seen as the underlying relationship patterns of primary school teams as informal/organic CoPs or “social learning spaces,” we can consider these network aspects as important factors influencing the extent to which ECTs have access to informal CoPs/social learning spaces through which they can develop knowledge regarding teaching. In this respect, the results show that ECTs profit from an informal CoP/social learning space in which not one team member, but the entire group provides high-quality and diverse support. To ensure that through the informal CoP/social learning space, ECTs are supported, they also must be actively engaged themselves by purposefully connecting to their colleagues. Hereby relational knowledge is important: ECTs should have insights into the expertise of all

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

121

members in the CoP/social learning space to facilitate efficient support. Moreover, the willingness of teachers to support ECTs as well as the active attitude of ECTs regarding engaging in contact with their colleagues requires a supportive and collaborative school culture. Only then, an informal CoP/social learning space can flourish. In case they are embedded in such-like CoPs/social learning spaces, positive effects regarding ECTs’ job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment and intrinsic motivation to teach can be expected.

Recommendations for Policy and Practice Worldwide, there is a call for high-quality support for ECTs (OECD, 2005). Based on this project’s results, several implications regarding the organisation of induction support are formulated. Even though the results are situated in the Flemish context, we believe that these implications can also be informative and helpful for other countries that are facing similar challenges regarding early career teacher retention

Policy-Related Implications Previous studies have demonstrated the positive impact of induction programmes on teacher retention (e.g., Ingersoll & Strong, 2011), ECTs’ well-being (e.g., Kessels, 2010), and ECTs’ professional development (e.g., Achinstein & Barrett, 2004). Until recently (and this was still true during the time of the study), in Flanders, there was no formal induction programme. However, the new agreement between teacher unions and teacher employers (hereafter referred to as CAO XI; collectieve arbeidsovereenkomst) states that from 1 September 2019 onwards, teacher induction is a right and duty for every ECT. To fulfil this right and duty, school boards receive additional resources to offer induction support. However, the CAO XI does not specify how these resources should be allocated; the school boards are able to decide themselves how and to what extent induction support is organised. This can cause schools to organise induction support in such a way that it fits with their unique school culture, organisation and needs. At the same time, the vagueness of the allocation of resources can also be a pitfall in that schools do not always know how to best organise induction support. Granting autonomy to schools is crucial in the Flemish education context, which causes policy makers to be limited in giving directions to schools. However, we believe that it is crucial to clearly emphasise the importance of using the additional resources for high-quality induction support. An option for policy makers can be to reinstall the abolished formal “mentoring hours” (these were introduced by the decree on teacher education in 2006 but revoked because of savings measures). The main focus of pairing up ECTs with a mentor is providing the former with assistance, encompassing information, coaching and training (Kelchtermans, 2019; Struyve et al., 2016). However, although mentoring may be an effective option, this project suggests that offering support to ECTs should not be limited

122

L. Thomas et al.

to a single designated person (Struyve et al., 2016). We plead for policy makers to underline the importance of induction support as a school-wide responsibility, wherein the entire team is stimulated to support the ECT. This does not mean that we should abandon the notion of mentoring. A mentor can facilitate the socialisation processes of ECTs so they can more effectively connect to their colleagues (Struyve et al., 2016). The project’s findings suggested that receiving support from colleagues is positively related to ECTs’ job attitudes. The results also showed, however, that lack of time is an inhibiting factor in forming ties. In this respect, an implication for policy makers can be to reduce the teaching load of ECTs in favour of designated time to connect with their mentor and other colleagues (Howey & Zimpher, 1989). By exempting not only mentors but also ECTs from a part of their teaching tasks, the latter may be able to observe their experienced teachers’ classes, spend more time in the staffroom, and in this way meet with, and learn from, colleagues in CoPs. Apart from reducing ECTs’ teaching load in favour of connecting with their colleagues, another implication could be for policy makers to invest in full-time assignments for ECTs in one school. This provides teachers with sufficient time to get to know their colleagues, forge relationships with them and navigate the school’s culture (Vanderlinde & Kelchtermans, 2013).

Implications Directed Towards the Actors in the School A first implication is directed towards ECTs themselves. The project’s results suggested that ECTs play an active role in shaping their induction support. This implies that they may take matters into their own hands. Hereby, ECTs may profit from gaining relational knowledge. Previous research has suggested that to actively invest in a network, awareness of the network and its potential are required (Cross et al., 2002). When ECTs have knowledge of who has expertise regarding the challenges they face, they may actively shape their network and in turn be supported more efficiently. Being attentive to their colleagues’ expertise may help them in growing their network awareness. Therefore, we urge ECTs to be network intentional (Moolenaar et al., 2014) because actively investing in their networks may help prevent ‘arrested development’ (Van Waes et al., 2015a). This also entails explicitly signifying a need for help, which is a crucial condition for getting aid (Kelchtermans, 2006). Even though we advise ECTs to invest in their network, we acknowledge that there is still work to be done to unravel whether it is even possible to foster a competence such as network intentionality (Van Waes, 2017). And if so, how it can be realised? Previous work (Cross et al., 2002; Van Waes et al., 2018) has assumed that networking behaviour can be influenced by increased network awareness. Nevertheless, it would be interesting to unravel this further and test this assumption thoroughly while at the same time investigating other possible pathways to further network intentionality. A second implication pertains to ECTs’ colleagues. Some ECTs are rather reluctant in asking for help for fear of being considered incapable (Le Cornu, 2013). In this respect, we want to stress the importance of ECTs’ colleagues being accessible

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

123

for help. The project’s results suggested that the accessibility of colleagues encourages ECTs to ask for help and build their support network. Furthermore, based on our results regarding teachers’ job attitudes, we believe that this support offered by colleagues should not only focus on professional aspects of teaching but also attend to more emotional (e.g., stress, anxiety) and social aspects (e.g., getting familiar with the school) (Kelchtermans & Deketelaere, 2016; Papatraianou & Le Cornu, 2014). A third implication is directed towards the mentors. Mentors can facilitate the socialisation of ECTs in the team, by increasing ECTs’ relational knowledge, and in this way stimulate them to connect to their colleagues on the one hand and stimulate all team members to offer support on the other. They can, for example, organise classroom visits and facilitate teaching-focused conversations between ECTs and their colleagues (Feiman-Nemser, 2001). Finally, we want to formulate implications directed towards school leaders. School leaders are advised to be aware of the importance of being accessible for, and supportive of, their ECTs. Specifically, the results implied that school leaders may act as transformational leaders because this is positively related to ECTs’ job attitudes. Furthermore, in realising school-wide induction support, school leaders need to create the cultural, structural and formal conditions for ECTs and their colleagues to interconnect. School leaders may stimulate the development of a culture in which collegiality and collective responsibility are central (Minckler, 2014). In her dissertation, Van Waes (2017) pleads for the creation of a “networked” teaching culture in which the strength of collegial relationships is leveraged for instructional improvement and organisational change. The results of the current project suggested that such a “networked” culture may also benefit ECTs’ job attitudes. Moreover, aside from creating the cultural conditions for teachers to interact, the school leader can also invest in necessary structural and formal conditions. Structurally, school leaders may be advised to create time and space for teachers to interact and form effective relationships. The school leader can, for example, allocate shared scheduling time for teachers (Minckler, 2014) and provide them with physical spaces to communicate, such as an inviting staffroom. In terms of formal structures, professional learning communities and formal CoPs (Geijsel, Sleegers, Stoel, & Krüger, 2009) as well as co-teaching initiatives (Struyve et al., 2016) can spur the exchange of support between teachers, which, for ECTs, may increase their potential to make use of the school network’s social capital.

Implications Directed Towards Pedagogical Advisory Services and Providers of Teacher Education Programmes Examples from other countries (e.g., Estonia, Norway) show that it would be valuable for schools to partner up with other players in organising high-quality induction. Colleges and universities that offer teacher education programmes as well as pedagogical advisory services can support schools in using the resources for teacher induction. With respect to both partners, some first steps have already been undertaken to strengthen their role in the organisation of induction support. In this respect,

124

L. Thomas et al.

the pedagogical advisory services are tasked to support schools in their mission to guide ECTs, and both pedagogical advisory services and colleges and universities that offer teacher education programmes are asked to work together with schools for the further development of teachers and the organisation of induction support (see Decreet betreffende de uitbouw van de graduaatsopleidingen binnen de hogescholen en de versterking van de lerarenopleidingen binnen de hogescholen en universiteiten, 2018, Article 104). This partnership is promising because it can promote continuity between teacher education and induction (Beijaard, 2009). These partners of schools can bring in expertise to meet the learning needs of teachers, as well as organise workshops and seminars wherein ECTs from different schools can learn from each other (Beijaard, 2009; EVALO, 2012). The latter fits with the idea that in addition to making use of the social capital that is present in the school network, ECTs can also benefit from relationships outside of their team. As a specific implication for the supportive task of the pedagogical advisory services and providers of teacher education programmes, we would recommend the use of network maps in their initiatives for ECTs. In the current project, it was suggested that having relational knowledge and network awareness is important for ECTs in accessing effective support. A network map may be a tool to promote ECTs’ network awareness. By visualising the network, the hidden potential in networks can be revealed (Schreurs & de Laat, 2014). For example, during “alumni events,” these network maps may be used to increase teachers’ awareness of their professional network and its potential for improving their job experience and practice. Network visualisations and SNA are already used in corporate settings to understand team relationships and how these relationships may facilitate or hinder the creation of knowledge (see Cross et al., 2002). In educational settings, however, this is still rare. An exception to this is a recent work by Van Waes et al. (2018). They found that discussing personalised network maps with teachers in a professional development programme had a positive effect on the size and diversity of their networks. Thus, using network maps to increase network awareness may be a promising way to strengthen teachers’ networks and improve their first-year experiences.

Conclusion The main goal of this research was to obtain insight into the relationship between ECTs’ collegial support networks and the precursors of teacher retention. The findings showed that support from colleagues matters. ECTs profit from qualitative support from a network of colleagues, and several factors can stimulate collegial support. Specifically, the results revealed that colleagues should be accessible for questions and help, and that ECTs should be active in shaping their support network. The latter is illustrated by one of the ECTs in our research, who said that: I actively ask my colleagues things: ‘How would you do this or that? Besides, it’s a learning experience, isn’t it: finding out who I can and can’t ask about these things. It’s all about trial and error. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, right? You might look stupid, but so be it. I’d

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

125

rather ask questions a bit too often than do something wrong. (see Thomas, Tuytens, Devos, Kelchtermans, & Vanderlinde, 2019a)7

In contrast, factors inhibiting ECTs from receiving support from their colleagues are, for example, being physically isolated from the team and having only limited time to engage in contact with their colleagues. School leaders also play an important role in the first years in the profession. Specifically, the results demonstrated that the more school leaders exhibit transformational abilities, the higher ECTs’ job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment and intrinsic motivation to teach. Additionally, transformational school leadership is also indirectly related to ECTs’ job attitudes, via increasing the number of colleagues supporting ECTs. Moreover, in the chapter we also supported the idea that organising induction support should not only be a shared responsibility of ECTs, their colleagues and the school leader, but also be a matter of partnering with the pedagogical advisory services and colleges and universities that offer teacher education programmes. With respect to the initiatives organised by these partners, we have recommended investing in strengthening ECTs’ network awareness and skills. Moreover, to make this all happen, we have requested attention on, and investment in, this matter by policy makers. By joining forces, we can further improve teachers’ experiences in their first years in the profession, and in extension improve the quality of education.

Key Takeaways • • • • •

Collegial support matters for ECTs in the first challenging years in practice ECTs colleagues should be accessible for questions and help ECTs themselves should be active in shaping their collegial support network The support from school leaders is also of crucial importance for ECTs School leaders—through their transformational abilities—play an important role for ECTs in their first years in the profession • Next to ECTs, their colleagues and school leaders, pedagogical advisory services and higher education institutions too can contribute to the support of teachers in the induction period

7 This quote was originally used in the following published article: Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos,

G. Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019a). Beginning teachers’ professional support: A mixed methods social network study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 83, 134–147. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.tate.2019.04.008.

126

L. Thomas et al.

References Achinstein, B., & Barrett, A. (2004). Re(Framing) classroom contexts: How new teachers and mentors view diverse learners and challenges of practice. Teachers College Record, 106(4), 716–746. Baker-Doyle, K. J. (2012). First-year teachers’ support networks: Intentional professional networks and diverse professional allies. The New Educator, 8(1), 65–85. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22(3), 309–328. Ballet, K., Colpin, H., März, V., Baeyens, C., De Greve, H., & Vanassche, E. (2011). Evaluatie van het professionaliseringsbeleid van basis- en secundaire scholen. Samenvatting over mentoring. Rapport OBPWO 07.01. Leuven: K.U. Leuven, Centrum voor Onderwijsbeleid en –vernieuwing. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman. Beijaard, D. (2009). Leraar worden en leraar blijven: Over de rol van identiteit in professioneel leren van beginnende docenten. Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107–128. Borgatti, S. P., Brass, D. J., & Halgin, D. S. (2014). Social network research: Confusions, criticisms, and controversies. In D. J. Brass, G. Labianca, A. Mehra, D. S. Halgin, & S. P. Borgatti (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on organizational social networks (research sociology of organizations series (pp. 1–32). Bradford, UK: Emerald. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing social networks. London: Sage. Bristol, L. S. M., Brown, L., & Esnard, T. (2014). Socialising principals: Early career primary school principals in Trinidad and Tobago. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 46(1), 17–37. Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 22, 345–423. Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Steca, P. (2003). Efficacy beliefs as determinants of teachers’ job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 821–832. Carmeli, A., & Weisberg, J. (2006). Exploring turnover intentions among three professional groups of employees. Human Resource Development International, 9(2), 191–206. Clotfelder, C., Ladd, H., & Vigdor, J. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement: Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673–682. Coviello, N. E. (2005). Integrating qualitative and quantitative techniques in network analysis. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 8(1), 39–60. Cross, R., Parker, A., & Borgatti, S. P. (2002). A bird’s-eye view: Using social network analysis to improve knowledge creation and sharing. IBM Institute for Business Value, 1–17. Crossley, N. (2010). The social world of the network. Combining qualitative and quantitative elements in social network analysis. Sociologica, 1, 1–34. Crossley, N., Bellotti, E., Edwards, G., Everett, M. G., Koskinen, J., & Tranmer, M. (2015). Social network analysis for ego-nets. London: Sage. Daly, A. (2010). Social network theory and educational change. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press. De Laat, M., & Schreurs, B. (2013). Visualizing informal professional development networks: Building a case for learning analytics in the workplace. American Behavioural Scientist, 57(10), 1421–1438. Devos, G., & Tuytens, M. (2013). De loopbaan van leraren en het belang van professionele leergemeenschappen. In R. Vanderlinde, M. Tuytens, I. Ruys, & M. Valcke (Eds.), Essays over de leraar en de toekomst van de lerarenopleiding (pp. 57–68). Gent: Academia Press. Edwards, G. (2010, January). Mixed-method approaches to social network analysis. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, NCRM.015, 1–30.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

127

Emirbayer, M., & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology, 99(6), 1411–1454. European Commission (2013). Key data on teachers and school leaders in Europe: 2013 Edition. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission, Directorate-General for Education and Culture. (2010). Developing coherent and system- wide induction programmes for beginning teachers: A handbook for policy makers. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/publications/handbook0410_en. pdf. Evalo. (2012). Als het krijtstof neerdaalt… Een bijdrage aan de beleidsevaluatie van de lerarenopleidingen in Vlaanderen [When the chalk dust settles]. Brussels/Ghent. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013–1055. Flemish Department of Education and Training. (2003). Omzendbrief omtrent tijdelijke aanstelling van doorlopende duur [Letter to the schools about temporary appointment of continuous duration]. Brussel: Vlaamse overheid. Flemish Department of Education and Training (2009). Omzendbrief omtrent functiebeschrijving en evaluatie in het basisonderwijs [Letter to primary schools about job descriptions and teacher evaluation]. Brussel: Vlaamse overheid. Flemish Department of Education and Training. (2013). Arbeidsmarktrapport prognose 2011–2015. Basisonderwijs en Secundair Onderwijs. Brussels: Author. Fox, A. R. C., & Wilson, E. G. (2015). Networking and the development of professionals: Beginning teachers building social capital. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 93–107. Fullan, M. (2015, October). Leadership in a digital age. Paper presented at Courage and Commitment to lead, Australian Council of Educational Leaders Conference, Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.acel.org.au/acel/ACELWEB/Events/Conference_2015_Presentations.aspx. Gaikhorst, L., Beishuizen, J. J., Korstjens, I. M., & Volman, M. L. L. (2014). Induction of beginning teachers in urban environments: An exploration of the support structure and culture for beginning teachers at primary schools needed to improve retention of primary school teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 42, 23–33. Gallant, A., & Riley, P. (2017). Early career teacher attrition in Australia: inconvenient truths about new public management. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(8), 896–913. Geijsel, F. P., Sleegers, P. J., Stoel, R. D., & Krüger, M. L. (2009). The effect of teacher psychological and school organizational and leadership factors on teachers’ professional learning in Dutch schools. The Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 406–427. George, J., & Jones, G. (1999). Understanding and managing organizational behaviour. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Gold, Y. (1996). Beginning teacher support: Attrition, mentoring, and induction. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education. New York, NY: MacMillan. Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and transformational leadership. Cambridge journal of education, 33, 329–352. Hargreaves, A. (2007). Sustaining professional learning communities. In L. Stoll & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth, and dilemmas (pp. 181–195). Berkshire: Open University Press. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2000). Mentoring in the new millennium. Theory into Practice, 39, 50–56. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York: Routledge and Teachers College Press. Hogan, B., Carrasco, J. A., & Wellman, B. (2007). Visualizing personal networks: Working with participant-aided sociograms. Field Methods, 19(2), 116–144. Hopkins, M., & Spillane, J. P. (2014). Schoolhouse teacher educators: Structuring beginning teachers’ opportunities to learn about instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 65(4), 327–339.

128

L. Thomas et al.

Howey, K. R., & Zimpher, N. L. (1989). Profiles of preservice teacher education: Inquiry into the nature of programs. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Rosseel, Y. (2009). The relationship between the perception of distributed leadership in secondary schools and teachers’ and teacher leaders’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(3), 291–317. Ibarra, H., & Andrews, S. B. (1993). Power, social influence, and sense making: Effects of network centrality and proximity on employee perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(2), 277– 303. Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 201–233. Johnson, S. M., & Kardos, S. M. (2004). Finders and keepers. Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Joiner, S., & Edwards, J. (2008). Novice teachers: Where are they going and why don’t they stay? Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education, 1(1), 36–43. Retrieved from http://peo ple.wm.edu/~mxtsch/Teaching/JCPE/Volume1/JCPE_2008-01-07.pdf. Kane, T., Rockoff, J., & Staiger, D. (2008). What does certification tell us about teacher effectiveness? Evidence from New York City. Economics of Education Review, 27(6), 615–631. Kelchtermans, G. (2006). Teacher collaboration and collegiality as workplace conditions. A review. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 52(2), 220–237. Kelchtermans, G. (2017). ‘Should I stay, or should I go?’: unpacking teacher attrition/retention as an educational issue. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(8), 961–977. Kelchtermans, G. (2019). Early career teachers and their need for support: Thinking again. In A. Sullivan, B. Johnson, & M. Simons (Eds.), Attracting and keeping the best teachers: Issues and opportunities (pp. 83–98). Singapore: Springer. Kelchtermans, G., & Deketelaere, A. (2016). The emotional dimension in becoming a teacher. In J. Loughran & M. L. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (pp. 429–461). Dordrecht: Springer. Kelchtermans, G., & Ballet, K. (2002). The micropolitics of teacher induction: A narrativebiographical study on teacher socialisation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), 105–120. Kessels, C. (2010). The influence of induction programs on beginning teachers’ well-being and professional development (Doctoral dissertation). Leiden, The Netherlands: Leiden University. Kilduff, M., & Krackhardt, D. (1994). Bringing the individual back in: A structural analysis of the internal market for reputation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1), 87–108. Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003). Social networks and organizations. London: Sage. Korir, M., Mittelmeier, J., & Rienties, B. (2019). Is mixed methods social network analysis ethical? In D. Froehlich, M. Rehm, & B. Rienties (Eds.), Mixed methods social network analysis: Theories and methodologies in learning and education. London: Routledge. Lachman, R., & Aranya, N. (1986). Job attitudes and turnover intentions among professionals in different work settings. Organization Studies, 7(3), 279–293. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Le Cornu, R. (2013). Building early career teacher resilience: The role of relationships. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), 1–16. Leithwood, K. A. (1992). The move toward transformational leadership. Educational Leadership, 49(3), 8–12. Leithwood, K., Leonard, L., & Sharratt, L. (1998). Conditions fostering organizational learning in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34(2), 243–276. Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy. Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers College Record, 9(4), 509–536. Mansfield, C., Beltman, S., & Price, A. (2014). ‘I’m coming back again!’ The resilience process of early career teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 20(5), 547–567.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

129

Marable, M. A., & Raimondi, S. L. (2007). Teachers’ perceptions of what was most (and least) supportive during their first year of teaching. Mentoring & Tutoring, 15(1), 25–37. März, V., Kelchtermans, G., & Dumay, X. (2016). Stability and change of mentoring practices in a capricious policy environment: Opening the “black box of institutionalization”. American Journal of Education, 122(3), 303–336. Mastenbroek, N. J. J. M., Jaarsma, A. D. C., Scherpbier, A. J. J. A., van Beukelen, P., & Demerouti, E. (2014). The role of personal resources in explaining well-being and performance: A study among young veterinary professionals. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23(2), 190–202. McInerney, D. M., Ganotice, F. A., King, R. B., Marsh, H. W., & Morin, A. J. S. (2015). Exploring commitment and turnover intentions among teachers: What we can learn from Hong Kong teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 52, 11–23. Mercieca, B. (2018). Companions on the journey: an exploration of the value of communities of practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia (Doctor of Philosophy). University of Southern Queensland. Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/ 34618/. Mercieca, B. (2017). What is a community of practice? In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of practice. Singapore: Springer. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1991). A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61–89. Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 61(1), 20–52. Minckler, C. H. (2014). School leadership that builds teacher social capital. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 42(5), 657–679. Moolenaar, N. (2012). A social network perspective on teacher collaboration in schools: Theory, methodology, and applications. American Journal of Education, 119(1), 7–39. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., Cornelissen, L., Liou, Y.-H., Caillier, S., Riordan, R. … Cohen, A. (2014). Linked to innovation: Shaping an innovative climate through network intentionality and educators’ social network position. Journal of Educational Change, 15(2), 99–123. Morrison, C. (2013). Teacher Identity in the early career phase: Trajectories that explain and influence development. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(4), 91–107. OECD. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing, and retaining effective teachers. Paris: OECD OECD. (2014). TALIS 2013 results: An international perspective on teaching and learning. Paris: OECD. Paffen, P. (2011). Wat is typerend voor transformationele leiders? Holland Belgium Management Review, 139, 8–14. Papatraianou, L. H., & Le Cornu, R. (2014). Problematising the role of personal and professional relationships in early career teacher resilience. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(1), 100–116. Richer, S. F., Blanchard, C. M., & Vallerand, R. J. (2002). A motivational model of work turnover. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(10), 2089–2113. Sasovova, Z., Mehra, A., Borgatti, S. P., & Schippers, M. C. (2010). Network Churn: The effects of self-monitoring personality on brokerage dynamics. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(4), 639–670. Saveyn, J. (2006). Aanvangsbegeleiding en mentorschap in het basisonderwijs. Retrieved from http://www.kerknet.be/vic.onderwijs.mb/pages/pdf/visieopaanvangsbegeleidingenmentorschap. pdf. Schreurs, B., & de Laat, M. (2014). The network awareness tool. A web 2.0 tool to visualize informal networked learning in organizations. Computers in Human Behaviour, 37, 385–394.

130

L. Thomas et al.

Soenens, B., Sierens, E., Vansteenkiste, M., Dochy, F., & Goossens, L. (2012). Psychologically controlling teaching: Examining outcomes, antecedents, and mediators. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 108–120. Stockard, J., & Lehman, M. B. (2004). Influences on the satisfaction and retention of 1st-year teachers: The importance of effective school management. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(5), 742–771. Stoll, L., Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Wallace, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional learning communities: A review of the literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 221–258. Struyve, C., Daly, A., Vandecandelaere, M., Meredith, C., Hannes, K., & De Fraine, B. (2016). More than a mentor: The role of social connectedness in early career and experienced teachers’ intention to leave. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 1(3), 198–218. Tickle, L. (2000). Teacher induction: The way ahead. Buckingham: Open University Press. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019a). Beginning teachers’ professional support: A mixed methods social network study. Teaching and Teacher education, 83, 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.04.008. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Moolenaar, N., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019b). Teachers’ first year in the profession: the power of high-quality support. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 25(2), 160–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2018.1562440. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020a). Transformational school leadership as a key factor for teachers’ job attitudes during their first year in the profession. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(1), 106–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1741143218781064. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020b). Unpacking beginning teachers’ collegial network structure. A mixed-method social network study. In D. Froehlich, M. Rehm, & B. Rienties (Eds.), Mixed methods social network analysis: Theories and methodologies in learning and education. London: Routledge. Thomas, L., Rienties, B., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020c). Unpacking the dynamics of collegial networks in relation to beginning teachers’ job attitudes. Research Papers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1736614. Thoonen, E. E. J., Sleegers, P. J. C., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T. D., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496–536. Tschannan-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783–805. Van Waes, S. (2017). The ties that teach: Teaching networks in higher education (Doctoral dissertation). Antwerp: University of Antwerp. Van Waes, S., De Maeyer, S., Moolenaar, N. M., Van Petegem, P., & Van den Bossche, P. (2018). Strengthening networks: A social network intervention among higher education teachers. Learning and Instruction, 53, 34–49. Van Waes, S., Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., Heldens, H. H. P. F., Donche, V., Van Petegem, P., et al. (2016). The networked instructor: The quality of networks in different stages of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 295–308. Van Waes, S., Van den Bossche, P., Moolenaar, N. M., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2015a). Know-who? Linking faculty’s networks to stages of instructional development. Higher Education, 70(5), 807–826. Van Waes, S., Van den Bossche, P., Moolenaar, N. M., Stes, A., & Van Petegem, P. (2015b). Uncovering changes in university teachers’ professional networks during an instructional development program. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 46, 11–28. Vanblaere, B., & Devos, G. (2016). Relating school leadership to perceived professional learning community characteristics: A multilevel analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 57, 26–38. Vanderlinde, R., & Kelchtermans, G. (2013). Learning to get along at work. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(7), 33–37.

5 The Collegial Networks of Early Career Teachers in Primary Education

131

Vansteenkiste, M., Neyrinck, B., Niemic, C., Soenens, B., De Witte, H., & Van den Broeck, A. (2007). On the relations among work value orientations, psychological need satisfaction and job outcomes: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80(2), 251–277. Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 54, 143–178. Wang, H., Hall, N. C., & Rahimi, S. (2015). Self-efficacy and causal attributions in teachers: Effects on burn-out, job satisfaction, illness, and quitting intentions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 120–130. Wenger, E. (2011). Communities of Practice: A brief introduction. National Science Foundation. Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of practice: A handbook. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/. Wenger, E., Trayner, B., & de Laat, M. (2011) Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a conceptual framework. Rapport 18, Ruud de Moor Centrum, Open University of the Netherlands. Willis, J., Crosswell, L., Morrison, C., Gibson, A., & Ryan, M. (2017). Looking for leadership: the potential of dialogic reflexivity with rural early-career teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(7), 794–809.

Published Works of the Research that form the Basis for this Chapter Thomas, L., Rienties, B., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020c). Unpacking the dynamics of collegial networks in relation to beginning teachers’ job attitudes. Research Papers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2020.1736614. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019a). Beginning teachers’ professional support: A mixed methods social network study. Teaching and Teacher education, 83, 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.04.008. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Moolenaar, N., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019b). Teachers’ first year in the profession: The power of high-quality support. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 25(2), 160–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2018.1562440. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020a). Transformational school leadership as a key factor for teachers’ job attitudes during their first year in the profession. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(1), 106–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1741143218781064. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2020b). Unpacking beginning teachers’ collegial network structure: A mixed-method social network study. In D. Froehlich, M. Rehm, & B. Rienties (Eds.), Mixed methods social network analysis: Theories and methodologies in learning and education. London: Routledge.

Chapter 6

Professional Learning in Networked Communities: Models and Methods—A Northern Ireland Reflection Celia O’Hagan Abstract This chapter builds on the reflections thus far in the book that demonstrate the urgent global need for a new landscape of career-long teacher professional learning. The gap in policy has long since required attention. No greater evidence exists than at the current time and in the recent context where schools, colleges and universities are stretched and challenged. Calls for equity, democracy and empowerment for the teaching profession are now commonplace. Accountability and excellence in teaching and learning are an internationally accepted and researched phenomena. In Northern Ireland, like many international and European counterparts, teacher educators call for change, and, strive to advance appropriate frameworks that will support and develop the teaching profession while drawing upon creative and new models of effective practice in the provision of initial, early and continuing professional development (Farren, Clarke, & O’Doherty, 2019; McAleavy, O’Hagan, & Fleming, 2009; McElearney, Murphy, & Radcliffe, 2019). Building capacity for a learning leadership strategy (Department of Education [DE], 2016), now viewed as key to the future of professional learning, the teaching profession collectively aspire towards an agreed framework. A new era of collaboration and evidencebased practice and networking are integral to the future. The chapter aims to identify key, impact-rich professional learning models to share, influence and inform teacher educators, school managers and policy makers who seek to support strategies that will make “the” difference to the pupil experience at the core of school effectiveness planning. The three-stage model of learning in networked communities outlined in this chapter recognises existing elements of good practice while aiming for excellence in teaching and learning. Reflecting on inter-country studies and research, the author will position an embedded model of professional development at the core of the chapter, demonstrating its applicability as an inter-country and intra-country approach to future teacher education partnerships. Keywords Models of professional learning · Leadership · Formal and informal teacher education · Participatory action learning · Participatory action research · Early career and in-service teacher education · Whole school effectiveness · Community of Practice

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_6

133

134

C. O’Hagan

Introduction-Defining Professional Learning To begin any discussion about the concept of professional learning, it is important to consider first the context within which learning takes place while recognising the various stakeholders and the roles that make up a teacher education community. Most teacher professional learning journeys begin with the student-teacher following a programme of study known as pre-service education—usually by attending a teacher education college or university course followed by an immersion in the community itself. This offers work-based or in-service professionals, working with co-professional teams and the opportunity to learn in practice. This in-service teacher education affords the practitioner the opportunity to observe and create the practicum within which they aspire to advance as teachers. Many have investigated the value and benefit associated with the various complimentary elements of the teacher education journey. Nationally and internationally it is recognised that teacher education is the lever for transformation in schools and improved learning for all in our society (Murray & Jeffrey, 2015, p. 7). Vitally, as part of this acceptance of the value of teacher education programmes, research in this field supports the central agent for such change and growth in schools and colleges, namely the value of community-based teacher educators. Working alongside the formal pre-service or in-service taught programmes for teachers (Zeichner, Bowman, Guillen, & Napolitan, 2016), community-based teacher educators have a key role in the social and cognitive learning of future professional learning (Kervinen et al., 2016). Many will feel this, as a message, is not significantly different to practices and developments observed in professional teacher education over the last 20 years (Campbell, Osmond-Johnson, Faubert, Zeichner, & Hobbs-Johnson, 2017; Hargreaves, 2019). Notwithstanding, the model of partnership, inherent in this idea of community-based mentorship, and the value, of course, of the work environment itself, adds much to the discussion about effective teacher professional learning of recent years. The concept of teacher education practices that takes place in the workplace must inextricably link formal and informal learning and practices as a continuum of professional learning if it is to lead to teacher-focused praxis. Equally, I would argue programmes of learning for professionals, organised by teacher educators—for example within universities or teacher education colleges—must align to an in-service experience, known as teaching practice and/or school-based work, with exactly the same principles in mind. It is essential to consider the concept of change or transformation (both individually and for leaders of learning), where the professional engages in reflection, as learning for the professional and for the profession as a whole. This chapter will review the preparatory ideas of teacher education as a key part of the teacher professional learning journey, however the focus of the chapter and the research that has informed the discussion is primarily about early and continuing professional development—beyond the qualifying stage of the teacher’s journey. The rationale for such a focus is demand-driven as it is the view of the author that

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

135

teacher-professional learning, post-qualifying, is an area of work that requires attention. This is where work needs to begin, where the gap is and where teacher educators and schools need to raise the bar even higher by cultivating teacher education partnerships and Communities of Practice (McAleavy et al., 2009; McElearney et al., 2019). The term transformation, in the context of pre-service and in-service teacher education, has also gained much interest in research discussions of recent years though it has also been part of the debate about self-learning, self-awareness and self-development for as long as teacher professional learning provision has existed. The importance of a transformational experience and the role of teacher educators— formal and informal—is inevitably the more vital part of the debate which requires continued support. All researchers and visionaries in this field of enquiry define transformative learning as a way of supporting the mind of the teacher to become more reflective while being prepared or upskilled during professional learning. This idea of the teacher or individual making meaning (Mezirow, 1991) is important when we seek to facilitate transformation throughout the various stages of professional learning and (adult) teacher growth (Fleming, Kokkos, & Finnegan, 2019). The learning project principle (Freire, 1998), built upon by Mezirow and others, is as much, therefore, about reflectivity and self-enquiry or awareness as it is about society or school study. Professional learning is also about connectivity and experience and teacher education and learning communities must reach out to each other, often, across distant environments to fully engage in a developmental practicum (Darling-Hammond, Auhl, & Hastings, 2017; Koellner & Jacobs, 2015; Heller, Daehler, Wong, Shinohara, & Miratrix, 2012; Sprott, 2019). The most successful teacher educators will teach using a role modelling approach to experiential learning and scholarly practices, however, even then, they are separated by time, context and environment (Hargreaves, 2019; White, 2019; White & Forgasz, 2016). It is essential that the formal and informal teacher education community work together to support and scaffold a teacher’s professional learning journey. This is true of both pre-service and in-service teacher education. The result is conducive to both reflective practice and transformational change in education (Loughran, 2013; Lunenburg, Murray, Smith, & Vanderlinde, 2017). The rejection of this opportunity may still result in continued knowledge acquisition though, often, without criticality, mindless or unquestioned practices. In the next section, the discussion will turn to how the reflective inquiry mindset can become the essential stepping-stone towards a community of practice and partnership approach to professional learning.

Reflective Inquiry as Part of the Professional Learning Model Reflective inquiry is fundamental to the promotion of what many will term reflective practice (Dewey, 1998; Schon, 1984; Whitehead & McNiff, 2006). Reflectivity

136

C. O’Hagan

is the inner part of the process often confused with reflective self-assessment in the context of teacher education. This quandary of terms and associated confusion is linked to concepts and practices such as active learning (Heron, 1999) or situational learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991) where the person—inner learning—and the context—environmental learning—are paradoxically linked. It is important to understand the differences and the associations of self and context when considering teacher professional learning. Schon (1984) referred to the reflective teacher as the thinking teacher outlining the various capabilities required during the reflective inquiry process: a willingness to self-assess against new praxis, self-awareness as part of the process of learning from research and/or others and a “responsibility” or duty to grow and develop within the profession and for the benefit of the pupils we serve. Reflective inquiry transcends the predisposition inherent in reflective practice research which focuses on the “self-study” credentials of the teacher (person) at the heart of the reflection. Building on the self-study principles of reflective practice, an inquiry is much more objective and progressive in nature allowing the developing professional to reach new heights in their practice and on their professional journey. This idea of both inner and outer growth is a much more emancipatory approach to change in practice than self-study alone (Elliott, 2015). The entire process offers opportunities for the practitioner to access inter and intra-networks, including scholarship, in order to trial new things, role model best practice and build their own epistemology of empirical learning. Anderson and Herr (2007) remind us of the need to close the science debate with reflective inquiry, where the exploration of evidence using a more acceptable scientific approach to qualitative research informs the development of knowledge and change in practice—usually as a result of reflective inquiry. To support this, they offer five criteria for use during selfstudy or teacher-research: problem resolution/finding, process, democracy, catalysis and dialogue. Lather (1986) supports this idea, outlining the need for objectivity in the process followed and clarity over the analysis of data including the need for validity checks in terms of triangulation methods. Many approaches to reflective inquiry exist in support of these views however the social science methods are the posited heir looms of scholars working in this sphere, tried and tested. The model of reflective inquiry at the heart of professional (self) learning predates the nineteenth century, however the power and science visionaries in this field emerged later in the twentieth century. One such scholar who offered a unique insight into the emergence of a social science practicum that changed the professional learning landscape was Grundy (1982). His ideas help us to explore the three modes of reflective inquiry in terms of the practitioner’s (self) learning and the context for learning as summarised in Table 6.1. This includes learning from and with a community of mentors (Roberts, 2000) and practitioners (participatory). He clarifies the idea of the individual (technical) inquiry and trials in the classroom as a valuable means of self-study and personal learning but one that is predicated on the power of the individual teacher without any verification in the wider practicum. Grundy’s second mode of reflective inquiry refers to the mutual and shared possibilities of such learning when developed with inter-networking, focused on the project

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

137

Table 6.1 Grundy’s three modes of reflective inquiry linked to action research Philosophical base

Technical

Mutual collaboration

Participatory

Natural sciences

Historical hermeneutic

Critical sciences

The nature of reality

Single, measurable, fragmental

Multiple, constructed, holistic

Social, economic. Exists with problems of equity and hegemony

Problem

Defined in advance

Defined in situation

Defined in the situation based on values clarification

Relationship between the Knower and Known

Separate

Interrelated, dialogic

Interrelated, embedded in society

Focus of collaboration Technical validation, Mutual understanding, theory refinement, new theory, inductive deduction

Mutual emancipation, validation, refinement, new theory, inductive, deductive

Type of knowledge produced

Predictive

Descriptive

Predictive, descriptive

Change duration

Short lived

Longer lasting, dependent on individuals

Social change, emancipation

The nature of understanding

Events explained in terms of real causes and simultaneous effects

Events are understood through active mental work, interactions with external context, transactions between one’s mental work and external context

Events are understood in terms of social and economic hindrances to true equity

The role of value in research

Value free

Value bounded

Related to values of equity

Purpose of research

Discovery of laws underlying reality

Understand what occurs and the meaning people make of phenomena

Uncover and understand what constrains equity and supports hegemony to free oneself of false consciousness and change practice toward more equity

Adapted from Grundy (1982, p. 363)

trial of the teachers within an area of mutual interest—teaching discipline or pedagogy—supportive of the collaborative nature of research testing and retesting. In his third mode, he explains the inner values of the learning collective, highlighting the importance of the mentor and peer learning within the teaching community and the power of this participatory and shared experience. In the third mode of reflectivity, drawing on both the self-inquiry practices of the technical mode and the mutual

138

C. O’Hagan

learning opportunities within the collaborative mode, the third mode is more participatory, focusing now on the exchange of collegial teaching values and the scope of project ideas or learning practices. This idea is centred around practitioner learning and the possibilities for new theories to emerge. It is focused on the idea of team or community learning, linking the individual and their self-inquiry with the values of the research team (of practitioners), empowering the individual and the team. Such empowerment, according to studies in this field, creates a consciousness that delves much deeper than the individual self-inquiry stage itself. This inquiry is more likely to enhance the individual practitioner in terms of their learning and the social change that pertains, leading to longer term impact and the sustainability of new and emerging practices potentially for the wider school community and associated networks. The concept of reflective inquiry, as part of a teacher’s journey, either during preparational studies for teaching or in-service professional development, will only be successful when there is an inclusive perspective of norms and worlds. Grundy’s third mode requires a teacher education paradigm and vision that is understood as part of the three-mode journey for developing teaching communities. Teacher educators, formal and informal, working in tandem, must form part of the emerging learning project and influence and inform this change. Having an equal vote is essential, and therefore, “power,” as Grundy says, across the professional teaching community, must form part of the learning journey using a scientific methodology for longer term sustainable change. School leaders and policy makers must also accept the vital partnership that is required (Duffy & Gallagher, 2017). The challenges of policy and the need for reform should not, and cannot, prevent this from happening. For the transition, however, to this third mode of reflective inquiry, and for professional learning as an outcome, the concept of impact (transformation) will need to be rehearsed. It is continuously overused and, often, abused, in non-teacher education circles. The term “teacher professional learning” in Ireland and Britain has emerged of recent years often where there is a strain on the focal nature of reflective inquiry, noting all three modes, essential for professional and transformational learning. It is clearly evident that such challenges call for change and reform. Government and the associated stakeholder groups, inter-professional bodies and research communities are all working with the strain and tribulations of poor political structures, complex funding models and educational policy gaps (British Education Research Association [BERA], 2014; Darling-Hammond et al., 2017; Department for Education [DfE], 2019a, 2019b; Department of Education [DE], 2016; Department of Education and Skills [DES], 2018; Education and Training Inspectorate [ETI], 2016; Galanouli, 2010; General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland [GTCNI], 2015). This chapter, while focused on the British and Irish context, shares this political and commercial common ground with both European and International teacher education communities (de Paor & Murphy, 2018; Farren et al., 2019; Sprott, 2019). It is important to consider the reflective inquiry modes by first exploring the norms and scope for professional learning and development. The collaborative nature of professional learning was presented by Attwood (1997) who offered a philosophical view of the teacher’s journey, suggesting “the concept that people have a right

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

139

to determine their own development” reinforced by the “process of analysing their own solutions, over which they have (or share) power and control in order to lead to sustainable development” (p. 2). Zubber-Skerritt, Wood, and Kearney (2020), illuminate this concept more recently by highlighting the ideas of the past, contrasting contemporary approaches to “teacher thinking,” “collaborative practices” and “professional learning” while distinguishing very clearly between action learning—individual and collaborative—and action research—the application of technical and scientific measures to the process. They highlight the professional’s growth and teaching excellence inherent in the participatory social science solutions. I am reminded of Freire’s (1998) work explorative of the “conscientization” process that reflectivity brings, where knowing is required in order to transform. Taken together, these ideas present a framework for professional learning to emerge, where the current thinking and the phenomena of partnerships for professionals will provide a catalyst for learning. This inter and intra networking idea sends a very clear message to teacher education communities and stakeholders. It is fundamental to the scholarly discussion, where most professional think-tanks, including policy makers, will accept that networking and learning is perhaps what has been missing in the mantra of teacher professional learning in the past. Many researchers and policy makers talk about the mentor and the cooperation of formal and informal teacher educators but ignore the power of the learning community itself and thereby leave such matters to the communities’ own devices. Here lies the problem. The learning-centred professional team must begin with the team members. Research into effective communities of professional learners as a phenomena places “learning” at the core of the process of school excellence and school innovation (Carpenter & Munshower, 2020; Parlar, Polatcan, & Cansoy, 2020; Rickard & Walsh, 2019). This highlights the social and human capital that may be developed as a result of the engagement in the team or community. Learning is thus a process outcome for the professionals individually and collectively (Beddoes, Sazama, Prusak, Starck, & McMullen, 2020; Lave & Wenger, 1991). Building partnerships and communities that transform into teams where new knowledge capital emerges is a complex process, requiring sufficient time, coach-mentoring and role modelling. While intricate, it is detrimental to assume, as often professional learning stakeholders do, that such partnerships will naturally form amidst professional learning networks. The cognitive learning needs of such a team, with professional learning as its core value, requires formal teacher education involvement, while the dynamic will be most constructive and conducive to learning when the social context and team leadership is influenced by school-based expertise. And, so, the Community of Practice is born.

140

C. O’Hagan

Methodology This chapter is based on a reflection of a teacher education journey of over 20 years, and a review of pre-service and in-service models regionally, nationally and internationally. It is also informed by a recent scoping study exploring in-service professional learning models and needs across three Northern Ireland schools. The current context of teacher education is thus explored herewith policy recommendations in support of a more Community of Practice (practitioner) approach (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2017, 2018) to learning partnerships for professional learning in Northern Ireland (Farren et al., 2019; GTCNI, 2015). This scoping study involved both documentary audits and a reflective journaling exercise, reviewing documentary evidence and policies in support of professional learning models in Northern Ireland, while comparing localised jurisdictions and good and best practices. This exploration involved classifying professional learning into three known categories describing the teacher journey: initial teacher education, early career learning and continuing professional development. Initial or preservice teacher preparation is the first stage of a teacher’s journey. Early career professional learning is linked to the second stage, usually immediately after the induction process and aligns to a teacher education professional learning framework in Northern Ireland. Continuing professional development involves post-qualifying learning usually beyond induction and early professional development periods. Induction, in the context of this study, is described as the initial teacher education entry to the profession and normally takes place within the first year of full-time teaching. Early professional development is undertaken within the first three years of a teacher’s career journey. Continuing professional learning is therefore descriptive of the lifelong career journey beyond the three-year early career period. The current context and models of early career professional learning were also reviewed during the scoping study involving a combination of participatory action research (PAR) and a learning leadership exploration for professional learning. Three schools took part in the scoping study. The participants included in-service professionals (teachers with a responsibility for special educational needs coordination in school), many who were early career teachers (n = 3), some post-qualifying (n = 3) and senior teachers, with significant teaching experience, who aimed to develop their learning leadership capabilities as part of the project (n = 2). The participatory action research (PAR) element of the project was a vital part of the explorative research and, while focused on three particular objectives, the professional learning approaches were critiqued against the overall evaluation of emancipatory outcomes—impact-focused professional learning. The emerging model of learning leadership was observed as part of the dynamic of the action learning and action research community of practitioners. The model was trialled in three schools with six teachers and two senior teachers. Senior teacher engaged in the role of coach-mentor. The research involved a range of

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

141

interactions with pupils, senior leaders, parents, and other school staff. An observatory and dialectic approach to PAR was taken throughout including a formal teacher education led programme of learning and a coach-mentorship model of leadership in support of the project. The focus was on reflective inquiry for self, others and the team or community of practitioners. Several levels of teacher education and coaching were put in place to support, very importantly, the senior teachers acting as school-liaison and mentors for teacher education. Teachers involved in the participatory action research (PAR) and professional learning journey remained involved at all stages of the study, including: • The planning and design of the programme for professional learning; • Professional development delivered on site including active learning and the role modelling of good practice; • Professional training in participatory action research (PAR) including developing a plan for trial, curriculum design and research planning for data collection and evidence-based reflective inquiry; • Self-study and evidence-based inquiry (reflective journaling, parent, pupil and peer feedback) during action research project implementation; • Peer reflections and shared learning through focus groups; • Good practice dissemination of learning events including storytelling and sharing of evidence (Wenger-Trayner, Wenger-Trayner, Cameron, Eryigit-Madzwamuse, & Hart, 2019); and • Survey questions. Two levels of relationship-focused action learning were utilised to develop what Lave and Wenger (1991) call the domain and community. First, the team formed and brainstormed in order to develop a coherent and comprehensive agreement about the purpose of the team, the ethical contract and the vital elements of the teacher education programme design. It took several meetings to establish a full social contract and, to support the school mentors as they developed a culture of ownership to the fore of the professional learning community. Next, the team engaged in discussions with schools and teacher educators (formal) in order to build trust and confidence in the process. This was observed and monitored throughout by the mentoring team (emerging informal teacher educators) working directly with the teacher educators from the College. Regular diary keeping/journaling and self-questioning pertained to manage the reflective inquiry across all stages of the action learning and action research process. The essential stages involved team building, socialisation and the development of a constructive learning dialogue supported by coaching and mentoring. This promoted the idea of cooperative learning with a very clear focus on purpose or what Lave and Wenger (1991) call the domain of learning. Following the programme delivery—teaching and role modelling of good practice organised—very carefully to meet the needs of the group, the practitioner learning became the focus. Building and developing relationships and trust was the most important part of the process, aided by reflections on problems, time to discuss challenges and the development of a problem-solving and decision-making culture within the practitioner team. This must be prioritised to support participatory action

142

C. O’Hagan

research (PAR). Ownership of the learning process and the agreed opportunities for trial and change were the focus of the research at this point (Little & Curry, 2009). Due attention was given throughout to the individual, with ongoing coaching and mentoring to scaffold self-awareness and self-esteem. Senior teachers liaised with school leaders to pave the way for the practitioner learning opportunities. This included quite significant operational adjustments which could only otherwise be recommended by formal teacher education teams. The role of the school coachmentor as a senior teacher was an essential part of the research, aiding and probing the learning process throughout, to sufficiently support and guide the practitioner on their journey. The research lasted thirty weeks, aligned to a full academic year, with scheduled and intermittent engagements as required, to support the teams and promote ownership at school and practitioner level. The teacher education support involved a range of full and half day workshops, delivered on the school sites, with opportunities for sharing and learning discussions and debate. This was facilitated by the employment of an active learning methodology. The programme was supplemented with online materials shared across school platforms. Creating a reflective learning space was crucial to the reflective inquiry process, enabling the community and the individuals therein to take sufficient time to normalise while preparing for new actions/new practices. Timetabling teaching during the programme was organised with this in mind. The learning was also sufficiently sequenced to allow for professional learning and reflective inquiry space. Post-participatory action research (PAR), using effective reflective inquiry methods including data from pupils, peer observations and lesson self-study, all practitioners disseminated their learning and cross-evaluated the evidence from each project supported by the teacher education team. This allowed the teachers as thinkers and “owners” of the learning to emerge. The teacher-researchers were free to explore both their personal learning and the pupil experience from their trials during participatory action research (PAR), thus developing what Wenger-Trayner and WengerTrayner (2018) call their practice. The shared learning experience was fully recorded and reviewed using transcripts later for text-based analysis. Key research questions were the focus of the observer’s study. Coach-mentors were encouraged to observe also to offer some triangulation opportunities for the researcher and teacher educator. Survey tools were used immediately afterwards to retest some of the evaluative questions. The method of professional reflective inquiry for practitioners was configured around the principles of effective lesson-based research study, however, this could not be fully engaged with, from an external observational perspective, due to teacherindustrial action at the time in Northern Ireland. The adjustment made allowed the teacher-researcher to study their lesson using their peers, a trusted colleague or classroom support and comparisons were later drawn from the participatory team. This proved very successful, perhaps even more so than the researcher’s previous experiences of action research using external observation opportunities. It is essential to allow the research team to emerge in professional learning domains. There are many reasons for this but the most important is the aspiration for transformation,

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

143

where the sustainability of change is much more likely where a team has ownership of purpose and relate that focus within the team to whole-school related needs. The evaluative research questions for the scoping study were: • Do practitioners involved in Teacher Education and PAR engage in emancipatory individual learning addressing the current context and needs? • Do practitioners involved in Teacher Education and PAR engage in emancipatory mutual learning addressing the pupil needs across the school for the future? • Do practitioners involved in Teacher Education and PAR engage in emancipatory collaborative learning addressing the learning for the team as an objective participatory process for growth and development? In addition, empowerment was reflected upon both in terms of the researcher’s experience and desk-based evidence. Using Short and Rinehart’s (1992) tried and tested indicators of learning, the researcher explored the six dimensions of empowerment, describing their view of professional learning where impact may be observed. The six dimensions include decision-making, professional growth, status, self-efficacy, autonomy and impact. Many support this view of empowerment as part of any professional learning journey focusing on many or all dimensions (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2015; Illeris, 2014; Murphy & de Paor, 2017; Netolicky, 2020). All agree on one thing, in particular, interestingly, that impact and learning must be both collaborative and practitioner-centred. This view places the sustainable nature of impact at the core of the professional learning experience with longer term possibilities, thereby recognising the value of pupil-centred professional learning and the need for action learning and action research that is transformative. Short (1994) raised the challenge that we now refer to as impact or improved practice suggesting all professional learning and, therefore, decision-making and change in practice, must impact the school and subsequently the learners. This view of impact was integral to the study methodology and deemed a core part of the overall process.

Community-Based Teacher Education The Community of Practice approach, the socialisation of the team in terms of purpose and focus, and, the overall learning-centred agreements that set the foundation for a professional learning culture, were integral to this scoping study. This provided an exploration of models of professional learning in context. The roles of all participants involved in the learning were observed in terms of the team ethos, the cultivation of the learners with a focused approach to action-based outcomes and collective learning. The importance of the coach as a teacher educator is crucial to this part of the journey aligning with the findings of McDonald et al. (2012) about the importance of the facilitator within a Community of Practice context. Law’s (2013) model of reflective inquiry at the core of an effective professional learning coach experience highlights the validity of the formal teacher education role both in supporting the practitioners and the leaders who provide community-based teacher

144

C. O’Hagan

education. We cannot assume these skills are inherited from our own preparation for teaching or from our experiential learning as teachers or leaders. Many will have acquired a sensitivity to learning but will remain challenged when mentoring others on their journey. The developmental phases of any professional learning programme necessitate a role modelling and coach-mentorship intervention, whereby the teacher educator becomes a steward for the team or individuals within the team. The author uses the terms interchangeably but acknowledges the vast array of skills required by the coach as a teacher educator and by the mentor as a peer and practitioner leader. The roles can be interconnected where one may grow from mentor to coach (Clutterbuck, 2006). Studies such as Tannehill and MacPhail (2017) demonstrate the importance of teacher education methods that take cognisance of the community and the context. They highlight the validity of collectively building social constructs and the need for collaboration within the teacher education community and wider school networks. This is supported by extensive research in the area of teacher professional learning for example Kennedy (2014) defining professional learning through the lens of a Community of Practice model and King (2014) who shared the view that professional ownership is vital to the change process for teachers. Lave and Wenger (1991) perhaps come closest to demonstrating the framework for the Community of Practice model to evolve, highlighting the essential nature of community engagement, purpose and context. In their research, Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder (2002) highlighted the need for challenge to emerge, introducing the idea of evolution and team learning as integral to the learning process. The Community of Practice (or practitioner-focused learning) CoP mo del is reported to include three essential parts as detailed in the diagram below. First the importance of a team and how it is formed, the crucial element of learning challenge and brainstorming within the team, and, the need for a facilitator (Wenger et al.,to coach the individuals and team towards the learning outcomes are all deemed essential to the model of CoP. This learning leadership perspective is crucial, it would seem, to the change process and the need for learning at the core of a professional learning team and future partnership. This supports the idea, like many other studies, that the formal teacher educators and the informal teacher educators that emerge, must be skilled in both leading learning and cultivating the social context and the individual teachers therein. Learning—for all members of the team—is at the heart of the model, highlighting the need for a learning culture and climate of change for individual and collective developments (Farnsworth, Kleanthous, & Wenger-Trayner, 2016) (Fig. 6.1). As Wenger (2004) observed: The very characteristics that make Communities of Practice a good fit for stewarding knowledge (and therefore learning leadership)—autonomy, practitioner-orientation, informality, crossing boundaries—are also characteristics that make them a challenge for traditional hierarchical organizations. (p. 4)

The coach and mentor role [or roles] within the CoP approach to professional learning is worth considering at this point. As part of the scoping study, and reflections on both pre-service and in-service models that exist regionally, nationally and internationally,

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

145

Fig. 6.1 The Community of Practice model (Source Wenger (2004). Retrieved from https://www. enliveningedge.org/columns/what-is-next-transformative-communities-practice)

it was apparent that the formal and informal teacher education role or roles must separately be considered if professional learning (individually and collectively) is to result and transcend the overall process. Teacher educators, in this sense, act as learning leaders in the process of cultivating the professional learning community. Chong et al. (2019) highlighted, in their study, the clear relational view that the “mentor” is at the core of all roles irrespective of title. The teacher educator, often, will act as a coach to others during the process but is very much driven by the needs of the CoP or individuals within the team and will emerge as a mentor where needed. Is there a difference between the role of mentor and coach if it is an innate part of a professional’s journey to require coaching—probing and challenge? The very characteristics that make Communities of Practice a good fit for stewarding knowledge (and therefore learning leadership)—autonomy, practitioner-orientation, informality, crossing boundaries—are also characteristics that make them a challenge for traditional hierarchical organisations in terms of mentoring support and guidance. The idea that mentoring is all-encompassing as a title or role is the experience of the author. The probing nature of the teacher educator, when a professional or team are ready to take responsibility for learning and decision-making, is a vital part of the practicum. The scaffolding process however, when required, is incumbent on the teacher educators involved in the process, recognising the challenges both socially and cognitively. At the end of the day, the coach-mentor, taking both together, cannot leave the professional learner or team with questions that are unanswered if they are to support progression towards goals. The secret, therefore, from the experience of this study and many years of coach-mentoring others, is that the formal teacher educators

146

C. O’Hagan

learn to move around what is effectively a continuum. Heron (1999) talked about the facilitation skills and the role of the leader. Often the professional is required to be more hierarchical—probing and challenging often, akin to the idea of the coach—while at other times they must move to a cooperative stance to empathise and respond to the needs of the individual or team—informing, advising, guiding, role modelling, similar to the definition of the mentor. These are deemed the key stages of the coach-mentor or facilitator involvement. A further stage is purported however where the coach-mentor will determine if the individual or team are ready to lead their own learning. As a continuum, this third stage is the graduation level where autonomy is passed to the individuals for their own outcomes. The teacher educator is able to release the learning project to enable the individual and team to progress and transform independently and collectively. Whatever this role is called, and there are many views on this, the professional learning experience must be coach-mentored and led by a very skilled team. The teacher educator has the awareness of the cognitive needs of the team, with real ideas to share and support capacity building and will often have the required role modelling and guiding skills to enhance the overall experience. Inter and intra networking also brings a wealth of experience to a professional learning team working as a community of practitioners. The role of the informal or school-based teacher educator is one that will often require support and when built on a coach-mentor framework and foundation, it will enhance the overall experience and outcomes for all concerned. It is an essential part of the professional learning framework. During this scoping study, the role of the teacher educators—formal and informal—was explored with evidence clearly highlighting the need for teacher educators to support the professional team formally.

Review of Findings from Scoping Study Phase 1—Desk Research It is apparent that many models of teacher education exist (BERA, 2014; DarlingHammond et al., 2017; de Paor & Murphy, 2018; DfE, 2016, 2019a, 2019b; DES, 2018; ETI, 2016; Farren et al., 2019; Galanouli, 2010; GTCNI, 2015; Sprott, 2019). The sphere of learning from this review of policy and programme design was categorised into three broad areas of study with a focus during the research on emancipatory learning (Grundy, 1982) and the opportunities in the design of programmes for empowerment (Short & Rinehart, 1992) and impact (Short, 1994). The study demonstrated the quality of practices that exists in support of teachers in Northern Ireland and in other jurisdictions. The professional learning frameworks reviewed are described in the data Table 6.2. As detailed above, the documentary audit and reflection on programme design, demonstrate that pre-service teacher education has the focus, perhaps correctly, on the individual learning experience and, while there is much potential for mutual learning,

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

147

Table 6.2 Comparison of pre-service (initial) teacher education, early professional development (EPD) and continuing professional development (CPD) Stage

Emancipatory individual learning

Emancipatory mutual learning

Emancipatory collaborative learning

Pre-Service or Initial

SF

OE

Nil

EPD

OE

OE

Nil

CPD

OE

OE

Nil

Code: SF—Significant Focus; OE—Opportunities exist; Nil—not the current focus *Please note this study was based primarily on desk research evidence and experience

it will be at the bequest of the school and not therefore guaranteed or required of all student teachers. During early professional development, the second stage of the teacher’s professional learning journey, and, in Northern Ireland, following induction, there is a school mentor who will offer guidance and support in the early career journey. Teaching councils will monitor the registration of teacher outcomes against the overall teacher competencies framework. This is a common practice in many jurisdictions. There are of course opportunities for learning to develop into mutual and shared experiences, however because this is not measured, nor is it a requirement, it is not guaranteed as part of the process. The area of interest emerging from this scoping study, perhaps, across all three modes of professional learning and all stages of the teacher’s journey, is for opportunities that support emancipatory collaborative learning. Various models of practice exist to support the opportunities for this to emerge in Northern Ireland, not least across the new project-based approaches to shared education and the opportunities inherent in the new collaboration through sharing in education (CASE) projects carrying government incentives and support (Education Authority [EA], 2016). There is no doubt that the pre-service professional learning programmes in Northern Ireland and across other jurisdictions hold firm the partnership approach to learning required to support a young teacher. The progression of that journey, however, is the area that requires some further consideration and reflection, and further consideration is recommended in terms of opportunities for emancipatory learning beyond the individual learning opportunities.

Review of Findings from Scoping Study Phase 2—Participatory Action Research for Professional Learning The next phase of this scoping study involved developing participatory action research (PAR) trials with a group of professionals and their school senior teachers acting as coach-mentors and in training [emerging] informal teacher educators. The Zuber-Skerritt, Wood, and Kearney (2020) model of participatory active learning

148

C. O’Hagan

and participatory action research (PALAR) was utilised throughout the study. This involved reflective inquiry over a period of one full academic year, with a clear review of evidence-based learning at all stages of the professional learning investigation. The initial reflections were focused on the “active learning” and the process of building a community of practitioners (Wenger, 2002), followed by the development of agreed trials in support of the common purpose of the professional learning team. Various data collection instruments outlined earlier were developed and employed aligned to good practice PAR (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2003; Whitehead & McNiff, 2006). All practitioners maintained an agreed self-assessment using a journaling/diary methodology. The teacher education team—formal and informal—worked continuously to support agreements and coach-mentored the professionals throughout this stage of the process. Pupil and parent feedback were gathered and encouraged throughout trials in the classroom with a focus on an agreed definition of impact— on learners and on learning. Opportunities for lesson-based observations including peers within the school environment were encouraged. A final evaluation of learning event was observed by both formal and informal teacher educators forming a transcript of the dialogue for reflective study. Analysis was interpretive in nature and thematic analysis (Mason, 1996) was used to evaluate the learning mode and teacher ownership dimensions. All participants were volunteers in the project as part of a professional learning experience. This study focused on both the emancipatory outcomes—individual, mutual and collaborative—and the six dimensions of empowerment—decision-making, professional growth, status, self-efficacy, autonomy and impact. The focus on impact was also reviewed in terms of both professional learning and the pupil experience including future plans for transformation with school support. Table 6.3 summarises the data from observations, the stage of a reflective inquiry within the group—mutually agreed—and across the group and schools—collaboratively shared. The variety of dimensions reported and shared during teacher Table 6.3 Review of PAR projects (n = 6 practitioners across 3 schools) and the impact and empowerment of the teachers Participants

Emancipatory Outcomes

Empowerment (six dimensions)

Evidence

Respondent 1

Mutual moving to Collaborative

4 dimensions

Data from self and pupils mainly

Respondent 2

Collaborative

6 dimensions

Data from self, peers, and others

Respondent 3

Collaborative

6 dimensions

Data from self, peers, and others

Respondent 4

Collaborative

6 dimensions

Data from self, peers, and others

Respondent 5

Mutual

3 dimensions

Data from self and pupils mainly

Respondent 6

Individual

1 dimension

Data from self

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

149

presentations of evidence-based learning demonstrated the value of the collaboration in its own right. The teacher stories and reflections highlighted the resilience of teachers, often trialling new ideas with little extra time given for exploration. The value of the community of practitioners in the team, to support and to challenge leaders when required, was highlighted positively during the project. In addition, the value placed on having the coach-mentor framework around the process was viewed as an integral part of the experience, highlighting evidence of enhanced and transformed learning both for the group and for the individuals. Table 6.4 displays snapshots of the dimensions experienced through individual, mutual and collaborative experiences of the learning.

Critique of Existing and Emerging Models of Professional Learning Professional learning for teachers requires a standardised framework that includes the vital components of cognitive development, social learning and collaboration both in terms of inter and intra networks (Netolicky, 2020). This scoping study, like others that have gone before, supports the essential nature of the teacher education role in terms of professional learning and the development of the community of learners. It is important also to recognise the validity of a partnership approach, in recognition of the context of learning and the need to build capacity around the community of practitioners who emerge. Learning leadership (DE, 2016) has been reviewed in this chapter in terms of the emerging roles for coaches and mentors, or what has been termed coach-mentorship in this project. The coach-mentor or teacher educator role is divergent from the possible norms of formal education descriptions. The skilled teacher educator operating within a community of reflective inquiry will support the professional learners and participants within the team as they progress from a state of action learning through to action research (Zuber-Skerritt et al., 2020). Referred to as the “Participatory Action Learning and Action Research (PALAR)” approach, this model recognises the essential elements of the teacher education programme design and PAR expertise often missing in professional learning. The models proposed to support progression therefore, taken with Grundy’s three modes of reflective inquiry in mind, and Wenger’s (2002) Community of Practice approach to collaborative and social learning, include three different levels of learning. The next section will detail the models and levels of learning.

Emancipatory outcome Individual

Mutual

Mutual—collaborative

Participant

Teacher

Teacher

Teacher

4 dimensions

3 dimensions

1 dimension

Empowerment

Table 6.4 Participant and Teacher Educator (Informal) Quotes about their Learning

(continued)

“The excitement of trying new practices is motivating me every day. I feel so inspired to take this forward. The pupils love the new approaches, and they are responding and engaging throughout. Parent feedback is coming in and showing this is working. I want to share this learning with all in the school and with others to make sure they know how to do this in the future. I want to be a champion for this.”

“This experience has made me change everything I do. I am working with other schools now to try new things weekly and we are checking on impact for pupils through parents and peer observations at every stage of the journey. I am committed to getting this right.”

“I enjoyed the learning but due to other workload could not fully trial and lost out on further learning. I hope to trial moving forward and have been greatly inspired to do so.”

Quote

150 C. O’Hagan

Emancipatory outcome Collaborative

Collaborative

Collaborative

Collaborative

Participant

Teacher

Teacher

Teacher

School based (informal) Teacher Educator 1

Table 6.4 (continued)

6 dimensions

6 dimensions

6 dimensions

6 dimensions

Empowerment

(continued)

“The value of collaboration and accessing expertise was key to my learning. I valued the engagement with the University from planning to implementation and evaluation. Teacher reflection requires time and mutuality will come from programmes like ‘making a difference’. I plan to share this with the school to advance opportunities for professional development and such good practice professional learning.”

“When you work with peers and experts you gain so much. I was challenged throughout but now realise the value of each step taken. My pupils have benefited greatly, everything I did was a learning opportunity for me and the group. I love the sharing and the experience of being at the fore of something new and innovative. School now need to take forward the next steps. I am ready to lead other teachers.”

“Learning together is the best thing for me. I have lots of sharing from my experience and I thoroughly enjoyed doing so. I am ready now to step forward and be the school champion. I will take these discussions forward with the school as an immediate outcome. Pupils will reap the rewards of all of our efforts as shown.”

“What a breakthrough. I see impact weekly; I know this works. I want to set up a new timetable next year with senior managers to make this happen for all pupils. I have already put plans in place with the school from my 1-3-5 action plan to showcase the work and have full support from SMT. I couldn’t have done this without the project, and everyone involved.’

Quote

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities … 151

Emancipatory outcome Collaborative

Participant

Teacher Educator 2

Table 6.4 (continued) 6 dimensions

Empowerment

“The journey has been about growth for all concerned. The reflection and analysis of learning throughout. I feel ready to develop my champion approach to drive this forward across the school and have been given the opportunity to work now inter-school. This is a humbling experience for me, learning from both taking part and observing. Some teachers will require more time and I have learned that this support for reflective inquiry must be given and planned with the school. I will ensure this is in place moving forward. Impact was evidenced. I now know what impact is.”

Quote

152 C. O’Hagan

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

SelfAwareness

Reflective Experience application

153

Professional Learning

Fig. 6.2 Individual Professional Learning (IPL) model

The Individual Professional Learning (IPL) Model—Level 1 There is a place, from this study, for the individual to learn from the collaboration but remain focused on their own learning practices and emancipatory outcomes. This model assumes participation in the community of practitioners and perhaps best describes the early career stage of some practitioners’ journey and developmental values and mindsets. The model outlined in Fig. 6.2 includes learning that will impact both the professionals and the pupils they teach. The model is best described as stage 1 of the early career or professional mindset. It purports the central nature of “self” and the reflective inquiry stage of the professional learner. While all key elements of support from the PALAR model are afforded to the group, this model confirms the need for the professional mindset to both develop and grow in terms of experience and value for learning.

The Mutual Professional Learning (MPL) Model This model shown in Fig. 6.2 assumes a contract that includes team learning and engages the professional in a series of shared learning experiences which has both influenced their professional development and informed that of their peers. This mutuality is central to the development of a professional community of practice where the individuals form clusters or learning teams either as a core part of the learning experience or as a sub-set thereof. The focus on impact is prominent for all concerned, mutually agreed and studied during the learning encounters (Fig. 6.3). This stage of development progresses the professional learner to a different state of readiness, where the values for growth and improvement are both individual and collective, allowing for whole-school related challenges to be addressed with a problem-solving and decision-making outlook.

154

C. O’Hagan

Fig. 6.3 Mutual Professional Learning (MPL) model

The L-PAR Embedded Model (Leadership-Participatory Action Research) The third model and final stage of growth for a community of practitioners, building on the fundamentals of Wenger’s theory about social learning, and the impact on learners at whole-school level, is the L-PAR model. This is focused on the development of the team process and active professional learning, and the vital link with classroom and whole-school action research, whereby the individuals within the CoP emerge as champions as a direct result of the engagement itself. This approach will focus on both individual learning and in mutual experiential learning as in Fig. 6.4. Leadership for “learning”—referred to as coach-mentoring in this project— combined with participatory action research process, using high-quality evidencebased educational principles and scientific methodologies, brings the embedded model to the surface supporting champion leadership and transformation within and out with the classroom (for individual teachers) and the whole school (for embedded learning longer term). Learning leadership (DE, op cit.) as a professional learning duty requires the coach-mentor as teacher educator (formal and informal) to progress the team to new heights. This approach will empower all participants in the process equally and has the principle objective of building capacity and raising standards for all involved in the process.

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

155

Collaborative Practices Team awareness

Professional Learning Practice Reflective Trials EvidenceBased Participative Study

Fig. 6.4 L-PAR Embedded model (Leadership-Participatory Action Research)

Conclusion The move away from teacher professional learning that focuses solely on professional training, towards an evidence-based learning culture that empowers our teaching profession, is the fundamental journey we are on as a teacher education community. Teachers must become responsible for their own professional learning in order to be empowered to grow, improve and aspire to become future learning leaders. The collaborative nature of professional learning is identified as the key feature of any future development. Never more than now do we need a robust and systematic approach to professional learning to emerge. While accepting the limitations of this reflective experience, and the scoping nature of this explorative study, it is essential in any discussion about the makeup or shape of future teacher professional learning frameworks to conceptualise the needs of the practitioner and the pupils they serve. The project methodology inherent in the PALAR concept has been brought to the fore in this study. This highlights the benefit of a Community of Practice approach to professional learning and the transformative leadership required to support the emancipatory outcomes of such a professional learning paradigm. The research questions for this scoping study involved investigating and reflecting on professional learning as a concept while exploring reflective inquiry across three particular modes: individual, in partnership with others or collaboration with networks and teams. Three linked models of effective practice have emerged offering scope and a potential change in thinking for future professional learning forums. It is envisaged these ideas will support course designers, teacher education leaders and key policy decision-makers. These models act as a magnifying glass into the future, demonstrating the types of formal and informal collaborations and professional practices that can impact

156

C. O’Hagan

the entire teaching community. Fundamentally, the study has shown that there is a need for a paradigm shift in teacher education, one that involves a collaborative social learning strategy aligned with a scientific view of outcomes and school improvement. Reflective inquiry, across the three modes, aligned to the three models outlined above, as a continuum of action learning and action research requires the support of teacher educators (acting as coach-mentors) if transformation is to be realised. The depth of the reflective state, mode one to mode three, will be achieved where the level of engagement and impact is planned and maintained according to the L-PAR Embedded Model (Leadership-Participatory Action Research) proposed. Teacher educators (formal and informal)—the power is in your hands.

Key Takeaways • Early career and in-service Professional Learning are fundamentally flawed if it does not include the support of formal teacher education processes: reflective inquiry, collaboration, action learning and evidence-based action research; • The three models of professional learning offered in the chapter provide a structured view of the practitioner and leadership journey; • Process learning is more impactful than product outcomes when it comes to the professional journey; • Collaborative models offered will emerge stronger in both vision and structure for future sustainability; • The three proposed models of transformation in this chapter offer guiding principles for the future whole-school professional learning journey, • All of the listed, proposed models drive towards excellence in teaching and require the inclusion of a professional teacher education intervention to support a culture of learning leadership that is evidence-based.

References Anderson, B., & Herr, K. (2007). El docente investigador: Investigación-Acción como una forma válida de generación de conocimiento. In I. Sverdlick (Ed.), La investigación educativa: Una herramienta de conocimiento y de acción. Buenos Aires: Noveduc. Retrieved from: http://www.salgadoanoni.cl/wordpressjs/wpcontent/uploads/2013/12/otros-tallerinvestiga cion-anderson_kerr_docente_investigador.pdf. Attwood, H. (1997). An overview of issues around the use of participatory approaches by postgraduate students. IDS, Participatory Research, IDS PRA Topic Pack (February 1997). Brighton: IDS, University of Sussex. Beddoes, Z., Sazama, D., Prusak, K., Starck, J., & McMullen, B. (2020), A team within a team: Relating coaching concepts to professional learning communities in schools. JOPERD: The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 91(2), 8–17.

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

157

BERA. (2014). Inquiry into research and teacher education. BERA-RSA. Retrieved from: https:// www.thersa.org/globalassets/pdfs/bera-rsa-research-teaching-profession-full-report-for-web-2. pdf. Campbell, C., Osmond-Johnson, P., Faubert, B., Zeichner, K., & Hobbs-Johnson, A. (2017). The state of educator’s professional development in Canada (Final Research Report). Oxford: Learning Forward. Carpenter, D., & Munshower, P. (2020). Broadening borders to build better schools: Virtual professional learning communities. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(2), 296–314. Chong, J. Y., Ching, A. H., Renganathan, Y., Lim, W. Q., Toh, Y. P., Mason, S., & Krishna, L. K. (2019). Enhancing mentoring experiences through e-mentoring: A systematic scoping review of e-mentoring programs between 2000 and 2017. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 25(1), 1–32. Clutterbuck, D. (2006). Organising mentoring programmes: How to be a great programme coordinator. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 20(3), 16–17. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. This report can be found online at: https://lea rningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-de. de Paor, C., & Murphy, T. R. N. (2018). Teachers’ views on research as a model of CPD: Implications for policy. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(2), 169–186. Department for Education (DfE). (2016). Standard for teachers’ professional development: A description of effective practice in professional development for teachers. Available at: https:// www.gov.uk/government/publications/standard-for-teachers-professional-development. Department for Education (DfE). (2019a). Teacher recruitment and retention strategy. Crown Copyright 2019. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-recruitment-andretention-strategy. Department for Education (DfE). (2019b). Early career framework. Available at: https://assets.pub lishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/773705/EarlyCareer_Framework.pdf. Department of Education (DE). (2016). Learning leaders: A strategy for teacher professional learning. Available at: https://www.education-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/de/ strategy-document-english.pdf. Department of Education and Skills (DES). (2018). Action plan for education 2018. Available at: https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Corporate-Reports/Strategy-Statement/actionplan-for-education-2018.pdf. Dewey, J. (1998). The essential Dewey: Pragmatism, education, democracy (Vol. 1). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Duffy, G., & Gallagher, T. (2017). Shared education in contested spaces: How collaborative networks improve communities and schools. Journal of Educational Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10 833-016-9279-3. EA (Education Authority). (2016). Shared Education Act. Belfast, EA. Education and Training Inspectorate (ETI). (2016). Learning leaders: Lessons on professional learning from other professions and other education jurisdictions. Available at: https://www.etini.gov.uk/sites/etini.gov.uk/files/publications/learning-leaders-lessons-on-pro fessional-learning-from-other-professions-and-other-education-jurisdictions.pdf. Elliott, J. (2015). Educational action research as the quest for virtue in teaching. Educational Action Research, 23(1), 4–2. Farnsworth, V., Kleanthous, I., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2016). Communities of practice as a social theory of learning: A conversation with Etienne Wenger. British Journal of Educational Studies, 64(2), 139–160.

158

C. O’Hagan

Farren, S., Clarke, L., & O’doherty, T. (2019). Teacher preparation in the early years of the twentyfirst century: 2000–2018. Teacher Preparation in Northern Ireland (Emerald studies in teacher preparation in national and global contexts) (pp. 101–111). Emerald Publishing Limited. Fleming, T., Kokkos, A., & Finnegan, F. (2019). European perspectives on transformation theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Freire, P., (1998), Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy and civic courage. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Galanouli, D. (2010). School-based professional development: Introducing research lesson studies (36 pp.). Report commissioned by the General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland (GTCNI). Belfast: GTCNI. Grundy, S. (1982). Three modes of action research. Curriculum Perspectives, 2(3), 23–34. GTCNI. (2015). Teaching: The reflective profession (4th ed., pp. 231–266). Belfast: Hamilton; Dordrecht: Springer Press. Hargreaves, A. (2019). Forward. In D. M. Netolicky, Transformative professional learning. Devon: Routledge. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2015). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press. Heller, J. I., Daehler, K. R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., & Miratrix, L. W. (2012). Differential effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(3), 333–336. Heron, J. (1999). The complete facilitator’s handbook. London: Kogan Page. Illeris, K. (2014). Transformative learning and identity. Journal of Transformative Education, 12(2), 148–163. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2003). Participatory action research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed., pp. 336–396). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kennedy, A. (2014). Models of continuing professional development: A framework for analysis. Professional Development in Education, 40 (3), 336–351. Kervinen, A., Uitto, A., Kaasinen, A., Portaankorva-Koivisto, P. Juuti, K., & Kesler, M. (2016). Developing a collaborative model in teacher education—An overview of a teacher professional development project. LUMAT, 4(2), 67–86. King, F. (2014). Evaluating the impact of teacher professional development: An evidence-based framework. Professional Development in Education, 40(1), 89–111. Koellner, K., & Jacobs, J. (2015). Distinguishing models of professional development: The case of an adaptive model’s impact on teachers’ knowledge, instruction, and student achievement. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 51–67. Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and soft place. Interchange, 17(4), 63–84. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Law, H. (2013). The psychology of coaching, mentoring, and learning. Wiley. Little, J. W., & Curry, M. W. (2009). Structuring talk about teaching and learning: The use of evidence in protocol-based conversation. In Professional learning conversations: Challenges in using evidence for improvement (pp. 29–42). Dordrecht: Springer. Loughran, J. (2013). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education. In Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. London: Routledge. Lunenburg, M., Murray, J., Smith, K., & Vanderlinde, R. (2017). Collaborative teacher educator professional development in Europe. Professional Development in Education, 43(4), 556–572. Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. London: Sage. McAleavy, G., O’Hagan, C., & Fleming, T. (2009). A study of work-based learning models and partnership in support of post-compulsory programmes of teacher education. Belfast: SCoTENs. McDonald, J., Burch, T., Nagy, J., Star, C., Cox, M., D, Collins, E., & Margetts, F. (2012). Identifying, building, and sustaining leadership capacity for communities of practice in higher education

6 Professional Learning in Networked Communities …

159

(Final Report). Australian Government Office for learning and teaching. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education, Sydney, Australia. McElearney, A., Murphy, C., & Radcliffe, D. (2019). Identifying teacher needs and preferences in accessing professional learning and support. Professional Development in Education, 45(3), 433–455. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Murphy, T. R., & de Paor, C. (2017). Teachers’ CPD and sectoral interests: Opportunities for convergence and divergence. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 242–249. Murray, T. C., & Jeffrey, J. Z. (2015). Leading professional learning. Corwan. Netolicky, D. M. (2020). Transformational professional learning: Making a difference in schools. Devon: Routledge. Parlar, H., Polatcan, M., & Cansoy, R. (2020). The relationship between social capital and innovativeness climate in schools: The intermediary role of professional learning communities. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(2), 232–244. Rickard, A., & Walsh, T. (2019, September). Policy, practice, and process in team teaching: A pilot project with co-operating teachers and student teachers on school placement. Irish Educational Studies, 38(3), 309–326. Roberts, A. (2000). Mentoring revisited: A phenomenological reading of the literature. Mentoring and Tutoring, 8(2), 145–166. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713685524. Schon, D. A. (1984). Leadership as reflection-in-action. In T. J. Sergiovanni & J. E. Corbally (Eds.), Leadership and organizational culture: New perspectives on administrative theory and practice (pp. 36–63). University of Illinois Press. Short, P. M. (1994). Defining teacher empowerment. Education, 114(4), 488–492. Short, P. M., & Rinehart, J. S. (1992). School participant empowerment scale: Assessment of level of empowerment within the school environment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(6), 951–960. Sprott, R. A. (2019). Factors that foster and deter advanced teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 321–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.11.001. Tannehill, D., & MacPhail, A. (2017). Teacher empowerment through engagement in a learning community in Ireland: Working across disadvantaged schools. Professional Development in Education, 43(3), 334–352. Wenger, E. (2004). Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge management through communities of practice. Ivey Business Journal, 68(3), 1–8. Wenger-Trayner, E., & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2017). Communities of Practice go to university. In J. McDonald & A. E. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of Practice: Facilitating Social Learning in Higher Education (Vol. 1, pp. v-viii). Singapore: Springer. Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of Practice: A handbook. Retrieved from http://wenger-trayner.com/https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-pra ctice/. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press. Wenger-Trayner, B., Wenger-Trayner, E., Cameron, J., Eryigit-Madzwamuse, S., & Hart, A. (2019). Boundaries and boundary objects: An evaluation framework for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 321–338. White, S. (2019). Teacher educators for new times? Redefining an important occupational group. Journal of Education for Teaching, 45(2), 200–213. White, S., & Forgasz, R. (2016). The practicum: The place of experience? In International handbook of teacher education (pp. 231–266). Singapore: Springer. Whitehead, J., & McNiff, J. (2006). Action research: Living theory. Sage. Zeichner, K., Bowman, M., Guillen, L., & Napolitan, K. (2016). Engaging and working in solidarity with local communities in preparing the teachers of their children. Journal of Teacher Education, 67(4), 277–290.

160

C. O’Hagan

Zuber-Skerritt, O., Wood, L., & Kearney, J. (2020). The transformative potential of action learning in community-based research for social action. Action Learning: Research and Practice, 17(1), 34–47.

Chapter 7

Conclusion Bernadette Mary Mercieca

and Jacquelin McDonald

Abstract Research and school based practice presented in this book articulate approaches to support and address the alarming attrition rates of Early Career Teachers. As this book has shown, allowing teachers the opportunity to work collaboratively in Communities of Practice is a positive way to ensure that their professional learning needs are effectively met, and their professional life not only survives, but also thrives. Research into the experience of early career teachers presented in Chapter 2 indicated the value of culture of learning supported by the Communities of Practice, mentoring and a structured induction process. The chapter outlines six key findings that have arisen out of the data in the various chapters of this book, which include the transformative role of the leaders; the significant role of middlelevel leaders within a distributed leadership model; the importance of a whole school community to support the professional learning and social well-being of early career teachers, how Communities of Practice to advance Early Career Teacher professional careers; how Early Career Teachers can support and sustain their professional life; and the value of online networks to support a wide network of teachers and how Twitter chat leaders sustain them. The chapter concludes with recommendations, future opportunities and challenges to address, as we work to support Early Career Teachers for the professional world they will enter and the strategies they need to thrive in this environment. Keywords Early Career Teachers · Community of Practice · Online networks · Leadership · Professional Learning · Social Learning Space

Introduction As this book has shown, allowing teachers the opportunity to work collaboratively in Communities of Practice (CoPs) is a positive way we can ensure that their professional learning needs are effectively met, and their professional life advances. As the early career teachers (ECTs) in Chapter 2 clearly indicated, without the support of the Communities of Practice, along with their mentor and the ongoing Induction process which their school offered, they may not have thrived as evidenced in the data. They were fortunate to be part of a school whose principal and Professional Development Co-ordinators had deliberately fostered a culture of learning, where © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald, Sustaining Communities of Practice with Early Career Teachers, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6354-0_7

161

162

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

there was a strong sense of collegiality among the staff for whom working collaboratively was a priority. The importance of this joint responsibility of the staff to help early career teachers transition into their new professional lives was also illustrated in the data discussed in Chapter 5. This did not happen by accident. As Chapter 3 illustrated, the leaders of this school in Chapter 2 knew how to “hold the reins lightly” (Cranston, 2009) and showed nuanced leadership in the sense of having a clear vision about what they wanted to achieve, grounded in a deep understanding of the culture of the school (Fullan, 2019). They were able to take their staff with them in introducing Communities of Practice, while at the same time cutting back on staff meetings so that they did not feel overburdened. Making structural changes to support the introduction of Communities of Practice is an important consideration that we will come back to later in this chapter. Unlike many of their peers who could only access short-term contracts or casual relief positions in their graduate year, the early career teachers in this school in Chapter 2 had mostly moved into ongoing positions in their first three years of being at the school. Given that the attrition of ECTs is significantly related to a lack of ongoing positions (Mercieca & Kelly, 2018) this was an important decision by the principal to retain his ECTs. And unlike other rural early career teachers who might tend to want to return to their home city after serving a year or two in a rural or remote area (McKenzie, Kos, Walker, Hong, & Owen, 2014) when interviewed for the second time in 2019, these ECTs had stayed on and showed no sign of wanting to move on. Apart from having ongoing positions, the impetus to stay was also influenced by the leadership positions that each had moved into. Although there can be disadvantages of rural ECTs becoming leaders so early in their professional lives (Graham, Paterson, & Miller, 2008), these ECTs felt that the support of their CoPs had allowed them to have the confidence to put their hand up and achieve the recognition that the leadership positions they accessed provided. Other ways of accessing quality professional learning were shown to come from online communities which were highlighted in Chapter 4. The skills that the Twitter chat leaders used to build and sustain their networks align clearly with the Lead Learner Competencies (Fullan & Quinn, 2016) including being committed to building relational trust, participating as a learner themselves and setting up and maintaining the structures for collaboration. Their voluntary commitment week in and week out is ensuring that all teachers have access to targeted professional learning no matter what their status, location or employment level. Below we outline six key findings that have arisen out of the data in the various chapters of this book: • The transformative role of the leaders in sustaining a culture of learning and growth and sponsoring and sustaining Communities of Practice • The significant role of middle-level leaders within a distributed leadership model in supporting and encouraging Communities of Practice • The importance of a whole school community to support the professional learning and social well-being of early career teachers • The ways which early career teachers can be supported through Communities of Practice to advance their professional careers

7 Conclusion

163

• The ways in ECTs can support themselves to advance their professional life and remain in the profession. • The value of online networks to support a wide network of teachers and how Twitter chat leaders sustain them. Each of these, in turn, will be discussed in detail.

Findings The Transformative Role of the Leader Transformative, inspirational, nuanced are the words we have used in this book to describe the characteristics of leaders—both principals and Twitter chat leaders— who can sustain a culture of learning and growth and sponsor the Communities of Practice (CoPs) that can support early career teachers as well as other teachers. What we have found is that, in many ways, the leader is the lynchpin in these communities—that they are metaphorically the ones who hold the reins (Cranston, 2009) and how they manage this will determine in many ways the success of the cultures and CoPs that they foster. As we have illustrated, they need an expansive vision (Ehrich, Simpson, & Wilkinson, 1995; McDonald, Burch, Nagy, Star, Cox, Collins, & Margetts, 2012; Netolicky, 2019) to determine what is possible for the community they lead. This is grounded in a deep understanding of the context of their school or social media environment—the issues, the struggles, the hopes, the dreams—and a capacity to inspire their members and engage them in collaborative ventures (Fullan, 2019; Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). An understanding of the culture of his school was evident in the way L1 the principal in Chapter 3, was able to work with a staff who had mostly been at the school for many years and were resistant to change and to inspire them to become involved in two collaborative ventures— coaching-based CoPs and Personal Learning Teams (PLTs). This was achieved by surveying the staff and building on their ideas, which included cutting back on staff meeting time to allow for more collaborative ventures. As Fullan (2019) notes, using the group to change the group is a sign of nuanced leadership. An understanding of the educational scene was also evident in the Twitter leaders in Chapter 4, such as Brett Salakas, who saw the need to connect teachers beyond the walls of their classrooms and called on his many connections—“ten super passionate educators from all different parts of Australia”—to help him build a new Twitter chat, the first in Australia. Without his vision it is unlikely that so many teachers primarily from Australia but also from around the world would have connected and learnt with and from each other. It is possible that this chat provided a model for many of the smaller chats such #includeEdau, that have emerged later on, prompting others to dive in and start other online communities. As the results of Chapter 5 revealed, the more first-year teachers in Belgium perceived their principal to have transformational abilities, the more the early career teachers (ECTs) were intrinsically motivated to teach, feel affectively committed

164

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

to the school, and were satisfied with the job. Principals were shown to the have the ability to increase teachers’ motivation and satisfaction partly by elevating their belief in their competences. Conversely, negative feedback from the principal was found to negatively influence the ECTs’ job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation to teach. Indirectly, they also influenced staff attitudes, via the number of colleagues supporting the ECTs. This meant the higher the ECTs’ perception of the principal as a transformational school leader, the higher the number of colleagues reported by the ECTs as providers of professional support, and in turn, the higher ECTs’ scores on the job attitudes, in a kind of ripple effect. Transformational, nuanced leadership is closely linked firstly with moral purpose (Lovett & Cameron, —the moral courage to grasp the nettle, take risks, confront institutional inertia—and secondly through their willingness to adopt a model of distributed leadership (Gronn, 2010; Jones & Harvey, 2017). As mentioned above, confronting the institutional inertia of his school—“like trying to turn the Titanic”— and setting up a collaborative environment required moral courage from L1 and his team. It is not easy to inspire a large staff group and to move them to a point where L3 could note, two years later, “There is very little negative talk about PLTs—it’s always positive. They’re like, I’m really looking forward to doing this.” Moral courage was also evident in the stoic leadership of the Twitter chat leaders, who, week in and week out, keep the flame of their chat alive. This is a voluntary role and most of the leaders have full-time work commitments. Without their efforts to find inspiring topics, setting up questions, advertising the chat, facilitating it, and archiving it, it is hard to see how many of the chats would survive. In a number of chapters it was found that leaders need to be enablers whose goal is “to legitimize the cultivation of Communities of Practice in terms of strategic priorities, ensure that the value of community participation and leadership is widely recognized, and create an environment conducive to sustained learning and honest reflection” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018, p. 11). This was illustrated in a number of ways including using distributed leadership to both model and support collaboration and strategically building a culture of growth. Distributed leadership, in the sense of organisational influence not being concentrated in or monopolised by just one person, but instead being dispersed or shared around (Gronn, 2010) was evident in Chapter 3 in the way L1 (the principal) worked collaboratively not just with his Professional Development Co-ordinators (L2 and L3) but with his whole leadership team in rotating the chairing of meetings and sharing decision-making. This approach spread throughout the school with other curriculum and year level meetings to the point that L3 in 2019 could reflect on the unusually good working dynamic within the school, “a really tight community of people working together.” Fullan (2019) maintains that no real progress can be made without a unity of purpose. This is what this school exemplified and what schools need to look at if they are wanting to bring about change. Enabling growth was also seen in the actions the Twitter chat leaders in Chapter 4 took to ensure their chat was relevant and appealing. It was Mark’s regular contact with a Grade 1 teacher who informed him about what was going on in her classroom and what the issues were that helped to make his chat. His chat, #edchat, has become

7 Conclusion

165

one of the largest in the USA. Similarly, Angie in Australia, goes to great lengths in facilitating #pstchat—which supports pre-service and early career teachers—to be “somebody who [is] nurturing and [has] the ability to listen and support the person who is talking to articulate their ideas.” Given that some of the members of this group would be casual relief teachers or teachers working in unsupportive environments, the importance of this kind of presence in a chat each week is inestimable.

The Significant Role of Middle-Level Leaders Within a Distributed Leadership Model in Supporting and Encouraging Communities of Practice The importance of middle-level leadership was also noted in Chapter 3, aligning with the research of Netolicky (2019) who found that middle-level leaders have a significant—but often unrecognised and under-researched—role to play in leading professional development initiatives. The Professional Development Co-ordinators (L2, then L3) in Rural College were influential in the development of the CoPs, not only facilitating organisational arrangements but in inspiring the staff to take on new challenges and gain the best value they could from the collaborate groups they were in. Wenger-Trayner, Wenger-Trayner, Cameron, Eryigit-Madzwamuse, and Hart (2019) speak of social artists who are leaders, other than the principal, whose role is to inspire their colleagues and encourage their involvement in CoPs in order that optimum learning opportunities can arise. In nurturing the CoPs that had developed (L2) and then later L3 showed themselves to be social artists in the way they inspired and encouraged their fellow staff members. Steps like opening the doors of classrooms by inviting staff to put their names and classes on a whiteboard that they would like to show others may seem what L3 did is a small step, but three years’ earlier it might have been met with indifference or resentment, rather than the enthusiasm it engendered in a school that valued collegiality and collaboration (Hargreaves & Fullan, 2012).

The Importance of a Whole School Community to Support the Professional Learning and Social Well-Being of Early Career Teachers The importance of retaining and advancing the professional life of early career teachers through supportive measures such as Communities of Practice and a culture of learning and growth has been a theme we have returned to many times throughout this book. As Chapter 5 highlighted, it is a school-wide responsibility—the entire teaching and administrative staff—to welcome and support early career teachers. As the research in Chapter 5 showed, high-quality support from a number of colleagues

166

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

is important for ECTs’ job satisfaction, affective organisational commitment and intrinsic motivation to teach. As one of the participants in Thomas, Tuytens, Devos, Kelchtermans, and Vanderlinde (2019) study reflected, “Your team, your colleagues, really make or break your experience of the job.” Similarly, the ECTs in Chapter 2 mentioned, “I think the friendliness is definitely a massive thing about Rural College. You just walk in—you get people smiling and going out of their way to help.” Specific ways that Chapter 5 suggested that are needed to create such an open and supportive culture included providing inviting staffrooms and other places for staff to meet and communicate and making key people who can support ECTs accessible. In practice, this might mean placing ECTs in subject-based staff offices where they can access subject-specific advice on a regular basis. The Chapter 5 results suggested that the accessibility of colleagues encourages ECTs to ask for help and build their support network. One of the author’s doctoral study found that the most favoured source of support (mean: 65.93%, n = 107) for ECTs was their staff office (Mercieca, 2018). Chapter 5 also recommended a reduced teaching load for ECTs in favour of designated time to connect with their mentor and other colleagues (Howey & Zimpher, 1989).

The Ways in Which Early Career Teachers Can Be Supported Through Communities of Practice to Advance Their Professional Careers Within a culture of learning and growth, supported by a whole school community, the role of Communities of Practice for early career teachers becomes a very targeted one of developing their professional practice. While colleagues’ and mentors’ roles informally are to affirm ECTs and answer their immediate queries, it is the role of the CoP to more formally challenge and stretch them as they participate in learning loops where they can experiment with different teaching strategies, share their successes and failures with their CoP and then try again, knowing that each time they have a supportive community to return to (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). As the data in Chapter 2 confirms, this is a far more effective way of learning new strategies than trialling them on your own. As one participant reflected, “I just wanted to get my practice right and get the most out of myself” or another, “Because our staff meetings are so large—like it’s over 100 staff. It’s just I wouldn’t put my hand up and complain. It’s too intimidating. But in the small groups you can really discuss it out.” Chapter 6 reminded us of the essential role of reflective inquiry and the kind of support required if team dynamic is to follow a particular path and the Community of Practice is to emerge supporting ECTs. This brings some controversy to the discussion, where previously CoP researchers suggest the lack of structure provides an essential breathing place for learning. The L-PAR (leadership-participatory action research) is highlighted as the challenge for us as CoP practitioners and teacher

7 Conclusion

167

educators, suggesting that freedom for learning needs to be probed if we wish to be successful as preparatory and in-service educators. As a profession, teachers need to be upskilled in this framework and scholarly approach, while allowing due diligence and freedom to learn using reflective self-inquiry as a core part of their journey. Self, as an entity, becomes about the individual and the team. Learning leadership, a new concept brought to this book from Northern Ireland policy and research, highlights how this is fundamentally different from ideas about “learning-centred” communities and practices, while building on the CoP model, as it draws out and underlines the risk within the assumption that professional groups may transform into learning empowered networks when certain conditions are met. In line with the findings of Chapter 3, the author of Chapter 6 suggests this will only happen where there is a transformational champion or champion-focused leadership approach. It highlights the value of structured action research methodologies and the enhanced opportunities of the professional teacher education team, in college/university and in school. Within the CoP, we found that ECTs in Chapter 2 had the opportunity to focus on the features of productive professional learning that Desimone and Garet (2015) advocate. This included content-focused activities centred on subject matter content and how students learn such as where one participant was involved in a Learning for Literacy PLT aimed at improving literacy across the school. The output for their group included specific literacy strategies that were able to be shared with the rest of the school. This also related to the feature of content, goals and activities being consistent with the school curriculum and goals, teachers’ knowledge and beliefs. Other ECTs demonstrated active learning where teachers are given opportunities to observe and receive feedback when they trialled material in their classes and then received feedback on their efforts when they returned to the CoP. One ECT, for example, spoke about how the CoP had given her ideas about how to structure her classroom and lessons and, in particular, cater to the needs of less able students through differentiating the content. Learning how to effectively differentiate lessons is a complex skill and one that is best learnt within the context of a CoP where ECTs can benefit from the wisdom of those who are more experienced—the “tacit knowledge” that rich depth of untapped knowledge that resides in organisations such as schools (Kemmis et al., 2014). This is also an example of learning loops mentioned earlier where “learning has to go all the way into practice and then back. And then into practice again!” (Wenger-Trayner & Wenger-Trayner, 2018). Finally, it obvious that sustained duration over the whole school year was evident in the PLTs that met fortnightly over not just one year, but several years. It was also interesting to note in Chapter 2 that the CoPs became places that scaffolded leadership for the ECTs at the school. Four out of the five ECTs who begun at Rural College in 2016, not only remained in the school three years later, but had risen to middle-level leadership positions of various kinds. As was discussed earlier in this chapter, achieving these kinds of positions too early in one’s professional life, which often happens in rural contexts, can have mixed benefits (Graham et al., 2009); however, in these cases it seemed to have positive outcomes. Wenger (2004) speaks of knowledge management as a function of CoPs and which produces usable knowledge for their members that develops their practice over time. This was evident with each

168

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

of the ECTs in Chapter 2 who felt that they had honed their skills in the classroom over three years with the support of their CoPs, gained increased agency and they now had the confidence to apply for different leadership positions. As one reflected that, “PLT membership demystified leadership roles” in the sense that he knew many of the people on a personal level through his CoP who were in leadership positions and felt he could ask them anything he needed to know about the positions he was going for. Another discussed how her transition to a curriculum leader position was scaffolded by being allowed to share the position with another teacher. This is an ideal way for an ECT to learn the skills of leadership without the pressures of doing it on their own. As she reflected, “Oh yes. I think that there been a lot of supportive people within this school in particular, so that you feel confident enough to go for a domain leader or whatever as well.” Yet another who had successfully moved to be a middle leader position overlooking student leaders reflected, “and looking back now, I don’t know how I would be functional at all in that role without that support.” Not only was he supported by his CoP but also the principal and the principal’s assistant. This was an example of a culture of learning working at its best.

The Ways in Which ECTs Can Support Themselves to Advance Their Professional Life and Remain in the Profession In addition to ECTs being fully supported by their school community, Chapter 5 also made it clear that ECTs need to be able to have the agency to support themselves to advance their professional life and remain in the profession. The findings show that the ECTs with the highest job attitude scores had relational knowledge in the sense of knowing other staff members and where to find the help and resources they needed and being able to actively shape their network (Thomas et al., 2019). Thomas et al. (2019) encouraged ECTs to be network intentional in the sense of not just being passive actors undergoing their first years of teaching but actively developing their teaching practice and professional identity (Moolenaar et al., 2014). This has implications for the way in which Initial Teacher Education (ITE) institutions train pre-service teachers and the ways in which mentors actively work with them, such as encouraging them to be proactive in seeking support and to take advantage of any opportunities that present themselves.

The Value of Online Networks to Support a Wide Network of Teachers and How Twitter Chat Leaders Sustain Them Finally, key findings emerged from Chapter 4 about the inspiring ways that teachers, including early career teachers, are being supported and challenged through their educational social media connections—in particular, Twitter chats. Over the past ten

7 Conclusion

169

years, this phenomenon has emerged as a way of connecting teachers in a global environment and meeting them where they are at as regards professional learning. As Twitter chat leader, Angie, reflected, it is “having that professional learning in the palm of your hand on your phone.” Many teachers are no longer content to have professional learning mandated to them by their school (Fullan, 2007; Holmes, Preston, Shaw, & Buchanan, 2013). Macià and García (2016) drawing on their extensive review of informal online networks speak of the “collective intelligence” and “shared knowledge” that characterise these networks (p. 292), while Holmes et al. (2013) refer to the rich, interconnected networks of like-minded educators who populate these sites. Carpenter, Tanti, Morrison, and Keane (2020) suggest that while teachers have traditionally found it difficult to connect with their colleagues across schools or districts, social media now provides the opportunity to do this easily and in “enabling wider sharing of resources, encouragement and wisdom of practice, hashtags can thus support the development of individual educators as well as the profession more broadly” (p. 18). As described in Chapter 4, Twitter chats sites are beginning to explore new options including the #edureading group founded by Steven Kolber, where members read an academic article each month on a relevant educational issue and then share their thoughts about it in a variety of ways including through recording videos in Flipgrid, tweeting responses throughout the month and then participating in a chat related to the article at the end of the month. These type of initiatives are fostering teacher voice, “eking out, listening to, and elevating the voices of those on the ground in our schools” (Netolicky, 2019, p. 15). In the concluding chapter of their book, Flipping the system Australia: What matters in Education, Netolicky, Andrews, and Paterson (2018) indicate: Flipping the system means focussing on lived experiences, nuances, contexts, and the humanity of education. It means trusting and listening closely to the people within the system. It means co-constructing a system–of distributed, webbed, non-hierarchical and productive network–from the ground up and the middle out. Flipping the education system is a vision for empowering teachers, supported school leaders, and a world in which the privileged few do not eclipse or speak for those pushed to the margins. (p. 246)

This powerful statement sums up what Twitter chat groups are striving for in amplifying teacher voice and creating an equal webbed platform where those with doctorates or in executive roles interact on a level playing field with pre-service, early career or casual relief teachers and learn from each other. As noted earlier, not all early career teachers are fortunate enough to have supportive school environments where they can build their professional careers— many begin their professional lives as casual relief teachers (CRT), often moving from small blocks of time between different schools. These ECTs often do not have a mentor, any formal induction processes or access to professional learning that the school might provide or allow more permanent teachers to attend (Mercieca & Kelly, 2018). Carpenter and Krutka (2015) also highlight the isolation many teachers experience, not only as a CRT but also for those teachers in unsupportive school environments. For them, online communities can take on importance in providing readily available and engaging professional development as well as the supportive social contact that they might not be getting from their school environment.

170

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

Given the importance of online communities to support and challenge ECTs, their leaders need to be supported in the best way possible. As has been noted earlier, their roles are all voluntary, despite the considerable hours they must spend in ensuring the flame is kept alive in each of their chats. They are not looking for financial rewards, but rather by the public recognition of their roles and encouragement from Initial Educational Teaching institutions.

Recommendations, Further Opportunities and Challenges In light of the emphasis throughout this book on the importance of supporting graduate and early career teachers, we recommend that particular measures need to be set in place in all schools. This includes intentionally appointing, training and supporting mentors for all beginning teachers, including the majority who begin their career in casual or contract positions. We also recommend that all early career teachers— casual as well as ongoing—are appropriately allocated in staff offices where they will be supported and have access to collaborative groups such as Communities of Practice to develop their professional learning. This may be difficult with shortterm contract teachers but given the benefits that can ensure and in terms of the growing early career teacher attrition rates in many countries, it is a challenge worth working towards. To this end, a shared understanding needs to be developed with school leaders on the needs of beginning and early career teachers and the best ways to aid their transition into the school through developing a culture of learning. Further research is needed into what is meant by learning for these teachers, and how that learning is fostered in Communities of Practice. We also recommend that early career teacher workloads are adjusted to make time for CoP sessions and follow-up activities, not just in their first year but in the following two as well. As we have strongly emphasised throughout this book, the principal and middlelevel leaders have a key role in supporting, promoting and cultivating CoPs. From a practical perspective, they need to be proactive in making any collaborative ventures visible to stakeholders and the wider community. Further research is needed into leadership approaches that foster and sustain transformative learning and the impact this has on student outcomes. As Grootenboer (2018) notes, “leadership needs to be understood, not as a set of personal qualities or characteristics, but rather as practice” (p. 36). As such, research is called for that highlights best practice and considers the outcomes for staff and students in these schools. We also need to work towards a shared understanding with Initial Educational Teaching Institutions about the type of educational world their pre-service teachers will enter and the strategies they need to thrive in this environment. This includes the distinct possibility that they will have a casual rather than ongoing position on graduation or have to move to a rural or remote location. Further, pre-service teachers need to be informed about the professional learning they can readily access through social media, in particular, Twitter chats. This involves more than a passing reference. Pre-service teachers need scaffolded experiences during their courses where they

7 Conclusion

171

can experience what Twitter chats have to offer as a professional learning resource (Spencer, Greenhalgh, Willet, Koehler, & Akcaoglu, 2020). Finally, our recommendations for online communities align with Macià and García’s (2016) suggestion that further research is needed into the practical outcomes of teacher professional learning through social media. As they noted in their review of 99 studies post-2009, most research has been conducted with university classes. More research is needed with teachers in schools about how they value their participation in online communities and the impact that their involvement is having in their classrooms. The Value Creation Framework (Wenger-Trayner et al., 2019) provides the means to gather both qualitative and quantitative data. This may be difficult to orchestrate, given that we know very little about the teachers who are involved and their motivations and characteristics in social media learning, but it is worth pursuing given the growing popularity of these sites. We also recommend that teacher registration bodies more formally recognise the professional learning that teachers are engaging in through these social media outlets. It is recommended that more support is provided by educational authorities for the leaders of online communities, such as Twitter chats. This might take the form of financial or workload relief in schools or educational organisations where they are employed. Again in line with Macià and García (2016) we call for more research into the distributed leadership that occurs in these groups and the factors that might help to make these groups more sustainable.

References Cranston, J. (2009). Holding the Reins of the Professional Learning Community: Eight Themes from Research on Principals’ Perceptions of Professional Learning Communities, Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 90. Carpenter, J., Tanti, T., Morrison, S., & Keane, J. (2020). Exploring the landscape of educator professional activity on Twitter: An analysis of 16 education-related Twitter hashtags. Professional Development in Education, 1–22. http://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1752287. Carpenter, J. P., & Krutka, D. G. (2015). Engagement through microblogging; Educator professional development via Twitter. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 707–728. https://doi. org/10.1080/19415257.2014.939294. Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teachers’ professional development in the United States. Psychology, Society and Education, 7(3), 252–263. Ehrich, L., Simpson, T., & Wilkinson, M. (1995). The principal as adult educator in the professional development of teachers. Journal of In-Service Education, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/030576 3950210205. Fullan, M. (2007). Change the terms for teacher learning. Journal of Staff Development, 28(3), 35. Fullan, M. (2019). Nuance: Why some leaders succeed and others fail (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Fullan, M., & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The right drivers in action for schools, districts and systems. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Graham, L., Miller, J., & Paterson, D. (2009). Early career leadership opportunities in Australian rural schools. Education in Rural Australia, 19(3), 25–34.

172

B. M. Mercieca and J. McDonald

Graham, L., Paterson, D., & Miller, J. (2008). Leadership in Australian Rural Schools: Bush Track, Fast Track. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.acu.edu.au/login?url=https://search.ebscohost. com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED502757&site=ehost-live&scope=site. Gronn, P. (2010). Leadership: Its genealogy, configuration and trajectory. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 42(4), 405–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2010.492959. Grootenboer, P. (2018). Theories and models of educational leadership. In The Practices of School Middle Leadership (Vol. 1). Singapore: Springer. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York: Routledge, Teachers College Press. Holmes, K., Preston, G., Shaw, K., & Buchanan, R. (2013). “Follow” me: Networked professional learning for teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38(12). Howey, K. R., & Zimpher, N. L. (1989). Profiles of preservice teacher education: Inquiry into the nature of programs. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Jones, S., & Harvey, M. (2017). Revealing the nexus between distributed leadership and communities of practice. In J. McDonald & A. Cater-Steel (Eds.), Communities of Practice—Facilitating Social Learning in Higher Education. Singapore: Springer. Kemmis, S., Wilkinson, J., Edwards-Groves, C., Hardy, I., Grootenboe, P., & Bristol, L. (2014). Changing practices, changing education (S. S. H. N. Y. D. London, Ed.). Singapore: Springer. MacGillivray, A. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technologies for communities. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 11(4), 99. Macià, M., & García, I. (2016). Informal online communities and networks as a source of teacher professional development: A review. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 291–307. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.021. McDonald, J., Burch, T., Nagy, J., Star, C., Cox, M., D, Collins, E., & Margetts, F. (2012). Identifying, building and sustaining leadership capacity for communities of practice in Higher Education (Final Report). Australian Government Office for learning and teaching. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. Sydney, Australia. McKenzie, P., Kos, J., Walker, M., Hong, J., & Owen, S. (2014). Staff in Australia’s Schools 2014: Main report on the survey. Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/. Mercieca, B. (2018). Companions on the journey: An exploration of the value of communities of practice for the professional learning of early career secondary teachers in Australia (Doctor of Philosophy, University of Southern Queensland). Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/ 34618/. Mercieca, B., & Kelly, N. (2018). Early career teacher peer support through private groups in social media. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 46(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 1359866X.2017.1312282. Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., Cornelissen, L., Liou, Y.-H., Caillier, S., Riordan, R., & Cohen, A. (2014). Linked to innovation: Shaping an innovative climate through network intentionality and educators’ social network position. Journal of Educational Change, 15(2), 99–123. Netolicky, D. (2019). Elevating the professional identities and voices of teachers and school leaders in educational research, practice and policy-making. In D. Netolicky, J. Andrews, & C. Paterson (Eds.), Flipping the system Australia: What matters in education (pp. 9–18). New York: Routledge. Netolicky, D., Andrews, J., & Paterson, C. (2018). Flip the system Australia: What matters in education. London: Routledge. Spencer, P., Greenhalgh, J., K., R., Willet, B., Koehler, J., & Akcaoglu, M. (2020). Identifying multiple learning spaces within a single teacher-focused Twitter hashtag. Computers & Education, 148 (103809). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103809. Thomas, L., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., Kelchtermans, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2019). Beginning teachers’ professional support: A mixed methods social network study. Teaching and Teacher education, 83, 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.04.008. Wenger, E. (2004). Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge management through communities of practice. Ivey Business Journal, 68(3), 1–8.

7 Conclusion

173

Wenger-Trayner, B., & Wenger-Trayner, E. (2018). Communities of Practice: A handbook. Retrieved from https://wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/. Wenger-Trayner, B., Wenger-Trayner, E., Cameron, J., Eryigit-Madzwamuse, S., & Hart, A. (2019). Boundaries and boundary objects: An evaluation framework for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 321–338.