**4. Supporting teachers to evaluate pedagogy**

The discussion so far, supported by the work of Bourdieu and Giddens has identified the stability of classroom practices. Teachers tend to maintain their practice from 1 year to the next and from one class to the next, unaware of the unintended consequences of their actions and institutional routines. Supporting the evaluation of their pedagogy is essential if teachers are to become reflective practitioners.

It is the interaction of the five factors described; habitus, teacher motivation, ontological security, routinization, and time and place that either promote or inhibit teachers' to reflectively evaluate and select approaches that will be most useful for their students. For example, a teacher may be motivated to change teaching practice to more effectively engage his or her students in their learning. However, if the teacher is unaware of routinization or is ontologically insecure, it is unlikely that the changes to pedagogy required will be identified. The capacity of teachers to critically evaluate the pedagogy they use in their classrooms is linked to their knowledgeability.

Giddens suggests that knowledgeability is a person's understanding of the rules and norms that make up social structures. In the case of teachers this will be both the rules and norms of the community and also at a professional level the rules and norms of teaching and the school in which they work. In schools, many of these will be implicit and only understood through experience and interaction with others. A teacher, student or parents' knowledgeability about a school will be their understanding of the conditions in the school and how these influences the way people act. For example, if a school has a long history or being involved in the arts, students' involvement in the annual school drama production is highly valued. Awareness of this school norm would help a new teacher to the school understand the enthusiasm of student participation in the performing arts. In contrast teachers can be puzzled and frustrated due to a lack of knowledge about conditions in the school. For example, if the local community the school serves is experiencing economic and social hardship students may be dealing with many stresses in their home life that is reflected in off task behaviour in the classroom. If teachers are unaware of these situation actions in class that would normally support student engagement may prove ineffective.

It is the difference between what is known and not known that can lead to unintended consequences of action by teachers. Expanding teachers' knowledgeability occurs when a person becomes aware of the conditions that lead to unintended consequences. This means that expanding teachers' knowledgeability has the potential to uncover routines supported by the tacit knowledge that undermined student achievement.

Burridge, Hooley and Neil have proposed that knowledgeability is linked to the concept, 'frames of practice'. These are the approaches and procedures that teachers use to build relationships and a classroom culture [17]. Teachers' frames of practice develop through experience, reflection and study where novice teachers will have less complex and established frames compared to an experienced teacher. As frames of practice become established and stable they become part of the tacit knowledge of the practical conscious. Experienced teachers will draw on these reflexively to manage their classrooms. This allows the discursive conscious to be attentive to students learning needs and unexpected or unusual happenings in the classroom. As teachers understanding of teaching grows so does the complexity of their frames of practice and with more complex frames, teachers become more competent to deal with new problems or situations. **Figure 1** illustrates this growth of new frames of practice, with more frames being developed and becoming stable in the practical consciousness as the teacher's understanding grows. These new frames are developed through reflection on teaching experience identifying previously unacknowledged conditions that led to unintended consequences of action.

In the centre of **Figure 1** are examples of frames of practice that a teacher may draw on when managing a class. The frames are connected as different frames interacted to inform a

**Figure 1.** Development of frames of practice.

pedagogy. They choose an approach they have found effective in one situation and research how it might apply to different subject areas. Being provided time and space for these discussions

The discussion so far, supported by the work of Bourdieu and Giddens has identified the stability of classroom practices. Teachers tend to maintain their practice from 1 year to the next and from one class to the next, unaware of the unintended consequences of their actions and institutional routines. Supporting the evaluation of their pedagogy is essential if teachers are

It is the interaction of the five factors described; habitus, teacher motivation, ontological security, routinization, and time and place that either promote or inhibit teachers' to reflectively evaluate and select approaches that will be most useful for their students. For example, a teacher may be motivated to change teaching practice to more effectively engage his or her students in their learning. However, if the teacher is unaware of routinization or is ontologically insecure, it is unlikely that the changes to pedagogy required will be identified. The capacity of teachers to critically evaluate the pedagogy they use in their classrooms is linked to their knowledgeability. Giddens suggests that knowledgeability is a person's understanding of the rules and norms that make up social structures. In the case of teachers this will be both the rules and norms of the community and also at a professional level the rules and norms of teaching and the school in which they work. In schools, many of these will be implicit and only understood through experience and interaction with others. A teacher, student or parents' knowledgeability about a school will be their understanding of the conditions in the school and how these influences the way people act. For example, if a school has a long history or being involved in the arts, students' involvement in the annual school drama production is highly valued. Awareness of this school norm would help a new teacher to the school understand the enthusiasm of student participation in the performing arts. In contrast teachers can be puzzled and frustrated due to a lack of knowledge about conditions in the school. For example, if the local community the school serves is experiencing economic and social hardship students may be dealing with many stresses in their home life that is reflected in off task behaviour in the classroom. If teachers are unaware of these situation actions in class that would normally support student

It is the difference between what is known and not known that can lead to unintended consequences of action by teachers. Expanding teachers' knowledgeability occurs when a person becomes aware of the conditions that lead to unintended consequences. This means that expanding teachers' knowledgeability has the potential to uncover routines supported by the

Burridge, Hooley and Neil have proposed that knowledgeability is linked to the concept, 'frames of practice'. These are the approaches and procedures that teachers use to build relationships and a classroom culture [17]. Teachers' frames of practice develop through experience, reflection

promotes reflection and critique, which encourage teachers to trial different approaches.

**4. Supporting teachers to evaluate pedagogy**

150 New Pedagogical Challenges in the 21st Century - Contributions of Research in Education

to become reflective practitioners.

engagement may prove ineffective.

tacit knowledge that undermined student achievement.

teacher's action. This occurs reflexively through the practical consciousness. New frames start to develop through the awareness of the discursive consciousness identifying the conditions leading to unintended consequences. This new awareness can lead to new approaches and procedures being used that over time can become stable and added to the established frames within the practical consciousness. In this way teachers build their tacit knowledge of teaching practice, and their capacity to reflexively monitor and manage classrooms.

can harmonise their plans of action on the basis of a common situation and definitions [20]. In essence, the focus of communicative action is towards understanding, learning and enlightenment [21]. Strategic action, in contrast, is where a group is focused on a predetermine outcome that maintains their position or power with in a setting. Such action will undermine the focus on understanding and whether done openly or covertly, will compromise the reflectively

Teacher Pedagogical Choice

153

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.73201

The interaction of the elements identified in this process supports teachers to take purposeful action. Development of public sphere for reflective discussions is the essential factor for the process to occur. Without open conversations about teaching practice unacknowledged conditions that lead to unintended consequences will not be identified and effective change

discursive process, summarised in **Figure 2**.

to pedagogy unlikely.

**Figure 2.** The reflective discursive process.

Problems occur when these established frames of practice are not attending to the needs of students, but the teacher unknowingly relies on this practice. This may come about through a change in circumstances or the influence of professional habitus clouding pedagogic judgement. Whichever the reason, it highlights the need to regularly examine practices to reveal unacknowledged conditions that may be leading to unintended consequences.

Collaborative discussions with peers as illustrated by Trimble Secondary College teachers' professional learning teams are an example of how practices can be examined. When teachers openly reflect on their teaching practices, describing and critiquing specific actions, unacknowledged conditions that lead to unintended consequences can be uncovered.

#### *Case snippet*

In Year 8, English classes studying how to write a biography, involved students researching and writing about a famous Australian. The level of student engagement was quite low, with only half the students completing the assignment. Although the approach was ineffective it had been the standard approach for years. Through discussions with colleagues, the teachers reviewed their practice and came to the conclusion that stories of famous Australians did not connect with the students' lives and their local community. This observation led to a change of approach by asking students to write a biography about a significant adult in their lives, which they would then present to family and community members.

*They learnt about skinny and fat questions and eventually, they had to find someone to interview and taped their interview and wrote their books. Then we had a night where they could bring their families and the person that they wrote about to a presentation night. The books were great, and I was really proud of them (the students). The kids had to get up in front of everyone. We had about 70 people at each night which is a better proportion than parent teacher interview nights, because their kid was going to present something. (*Tony year 7 teacher*).*

Connecting the curriculum directly to students lives combined with the authentic assessment of presenting the biography to an audience required a change in pedagogy. This only occurred when teachers identified the unacknowledged conditions of action of an assessment task that lack relevance to the students. The change to the task then altered the skills being taught and the pedagogy being used with a corresponding change in student engagement and learning.

For discussions such as the one described, that critiqued teaching practice, to occur, a trust environment must be present. Habermas' refers to this environment of trust as the 'public sphere' [18]. Within the public sphere, all opinions are given equal merit, and the discussion is an inclusive process with the goal of purposeful action that Habermas identifies as communicative action [19]. In communicative action participants are not primarily oriented to their own individual successes; they pursue their individual goals under the condition that they can harmonise their plans of action on the basis of a common situation and definitions [20]. In essence, the focus of communicative action is towards understanding, learning and enlightenment [21]. Strategic action, in contrast, is where a group is focused on a predetermine outcome that maintains their position or power with in a setting. Such action will undermine the focus on understanding and whether done openly or covertly, will compromise the reflectively discursive process, summarised in **Figure 2**.

The interaction of the elements identified in this process supports teachers to take purposeful action. Development of public sphere for reflective discussions is the essential factor for the process to occur. Without open conversations about teaching practice unacknowledged conditions that lead to unintended consequences will not be identified and effective change to pedagogy unlikely.

**Figure 2.** The reflective discursive process.

teacher's action. This occurs reflexively through the practical consciousness. New frames start to develop through the awareness of the discursive consciousness identifying the conditions leading to unintended consequences. This new awareness can lead to new approaches and procedures being used that over time can become stable and added to the established frames within the practical consciousness. In this way teachers build their tacit knowledge of teach-

Problems occur when these established frames of practice are not attending to the needs of students, but the teacher unknowingly relies on this practice. This may come about through a change in circumstances or the influence of professional habitus clouding pedagogic judgement. Whichever the reason, it highlights the need to regularly examine practices to reveal

Collaborative discussions with peers as illustrated by Trimble Secondary College teachers' professional learning teams are an example of how practices can be examined. When teachers openly reflect on their teaching practices, describing and critiquing specific actions, unac-

In Year 8, English classes studying how to write a biography, involved students researching and writing about a famous Australian. The level of student engagement was quite low, with only half the students completing the assignment. Although the approach was ineffective it had been the standard approach for years. Through discussions with colleagues, the teachers reviewed their practice and came to the conclusion that stories of famous Australians did not connect with the students' lives and their local community. This observation led to a change of approach by asking students to write a biography about a significant adult in their lives,

*They learnt about skinny and fat questions and eventually, they had to find someone to interview and taped their interview and wrote their books. Then we had a night where they could bring their families and the person that they wrote about to a presentation night. The books were great, and I was really proud of them (the students). The kids had to get up in front of everyone. We had about 70 people at each night which is a better proportion than parent teacher interview nights, because their kid was going to* 

Connecting the curriculum directly to students lives combined with the authentic assessment of presenting the biography to an audience required a change in pedagogy. This only occurred when teachers identified the unacknowledged conditions of action of an assessment task that lack relevance to the students. The change to the task then altered the skills being taught and the pedagogy being used with a corresponding change in student engagement and learning.

For discussions such as the one described, that critiqued teaching practice, to occur, a trust environment must be present. Habermas' refers to this environment of trust as the 'public sphere' [18]. Within the public sphere, all opinions are given equal merit, and the discussion is an inclusive process with the goal of purposeful action that Habermas identifies as communicative action [19]. In communicative action participants are not primarily oriented to their own individual successes; they pursue their individual goals under the condition that they

ing practice, and their capacity to reflexively monitor and manage classrooms.

152 New Pedagogical Challenges in the 21st Century - Contributions of Research in Education

unacknowledged conditions that may be leading to unintended consequences.

knowledged conditions that lead to unintended consequences can be uncovered.

which they would then present to family and community members.

*present something. (*Tony year 7 teacher*).*

*Case snippet*

The public sphere and development of trust will require an acknowledgement of different professional habitus and frames of practice. Supporting teachers to share their perspectives on teaching and learning will lead to richer reflective discussions uncovering the unintended consequences of practice, with an expansion of knowledgeability and frames of practice. This deeper understanding of teaching leads to more complex frames of practice that strengthens ontological security. The strength comes from teachers being able to manage anxiety, as anxiety is linked to the unknown outcome of choice [9]. Where there is a choice there is always the risk of choosing a course of action that will not result in the desired outcome. With more complex frames of practice, teachers are more able to see the range of possible outcomes, with an associated confidence in choosing a positive course of action.

*There was no one particular person leading it and that was the other powerful thing. It was like a team. There was Jimmy Hills and myself and another couple pretty interested in this idea, but no one was really running it. Each week we would come along discuss and report back and it gathered its own* 

Teacher Pedagogical Choice

155

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.73201

Ken and Trevor's comments highlight the stability of schools and the difficulty of change. Ken described the student behaviour and the difficulties at the school as serious that provided a strong motivation for change. Even in this situation, teachers were hesitant with fear of the unknown, high levels of anxiety were present that the situation might become more difficult. Trevor's reflections on moving to the table group approach in classrooms and cooperative learning was a significant change for teachers. It challenged not only the current structures of

A number of ontologically secure teachers led discussions about pedagogy that was the catalyst to reflect on current practices. The teachers came together to discuss approaches with all opinions being valued. It was this reflection in the trust environment of the public sphere that led to an expansion of teachers understanding and frames of practice. Only then were teach-

Such action highlights the teacher as the agent of pedagogical change, and it is the teachers' ability to, "rethink their social relationships and pedagogical practices within and outside of school…questioning and shedding previously cherished values and beliefs" [22], which provides the conditions to change pedagogy. It is this type of critical questioning that occurs through reflectively discursive activities which expand teacher frames of practice, developing the ontological security required for teachers to take purposeful action

Teachers make a difference to student learning when they choose pedagogies that meet the needs of the students they teach. Indications that these choices have been effective will be seen in the students' level of engagement with the learning activities, development of the students understanding of the concepts taught and their ability to apply these concepts to settings beyond the classroom. However, too often teachers become reliant on routine and are drawn into a reproduction of teaching practice rather than an evolution of their teaching practice that

To support teachers in making pedagogic decisions that are appropriate for their students, a number of conditions need to be met. First, space and time are required. Space refers to a cognitive environment different to the norms of their practice. Gathering together people from across teaching disciplines provides such an environment, as teachers from different subject

Time is needed for the development of trust which results in deeper reflective discussions. In the trust environment of the public sphere, all opinions are given equal merit and the critique

areas bring a range of perspectives to evaluate pedagogies being used.

*momentum. (*Trevor, classroom teacher and program coordinator*).*

the school, but also the teachers' ontological security and professional habitus.

ers able to take creative risks and implement cooperative learning pedagogy.

around pedagogy.

**5. Conclusion**

is responsive to the students being taught [9].

Even with a more sophisticated understanding of teaching practice and awareness of possible outcomes, change will only occur when teachers take action. This may seem obvious, but routinization, a desire to maintain ontological security and the influence of professional habitus supporting personal identity can be significant barriers to change. As discussed, the rules and norms of social structures although created by people also influence people's actions. In schools, as with all social structures, norms and rules exist because teachers have maintained the practices over time. This duality is the both a strength of social structures and a weakness. It is strong through providing a sense of security and weak when ineffective practices are perpetuated.

Because of the duality within social structures it is difficult for the action of one person to have an effect on the institution's structures or practices. Social structures develop through people reproducing the practice over time, leading to routinization. If the actions of many people are required to reproduce the practices the action of one person can be easily absorbed without a change to structures or practices.

This is seen in schools where ontologically secure teachers may transform the learning of the students in their classrooms, but other classrooms remain unaffected. For ontological secure teachers to have an effect on the structure of schools, they must assemble the social and cultural capital required for other teachers to view their actions as legitimate. If the actions are seen as legitimate, there is a greater likelihood of widespread change, but this will not occur without teachers involved in the process developing the levels of ontological security required to take creative risks for change.

#### *Case snippet*

*No, personally I thought people wouldn't be game enough to make the change, it doesn't sound like a big change, but for a secondary school it was… (*Trevor, classroom teacher and program coordinator*).*

*Mind you, the way we were operating at one stage here, on this campus; you probably wouldn't have wanted your kid to come to the school…Things have changed that much…if the kids have a disagreement, you can sort things out as people rather than just power. (*Ken, Year 8 classroom teacher*).*

*To change every classroom, every teacher had to accept it; it was no good if one person didn't, every classroom had to teach in that way. We knew that it meant a change in pedagogy… I really thought people would say, "no, this is too big", some said that, others were nervous but we went ahead anyway, and it's the best thing we ever did.*

*There was no one particular person leading it and that was the other powerful thing. It was like a team. There was Jimmy Hills and myself and another couple pretty interested in this idea, but no one was really running it. Each week we would come along discuss and report back and it gathered its own momentum. (*Trevor, classroom teacher and program coordinator*).*

Ken and Trevor's comments highlight the stability of schools and the difficulty of change. Ken described the student behaviour and the difficulties at the school as serious that provided a strong motivation for change. Even in this situation, teachers were hesitant with fear of the unknown, high levels of anxiety were present that the situation might become more difficult. Trevor's reflections on moving to the table group approach in classrooms and cooperative learning was a significant change for teachers. It challenged not only the current structures of the school, but also the teachers' ontological security and professional habitus.

A number of ontologically secure teachers led discussions about pedagogy that was the catalyst to reflect on current practices. The teachers came together to discuss approaches with all opinions being valued. It was this reflection in the trust environment of the public sphere that led to an expansion of teachers understanding and frames of practice. Only then were teachers able to take creative risks and implement cooperative learning pedagogy.

Such action highlights the teacher as the agent of pedagogical change, and it is the teachers' ability to, "rethink their social relationships and pedagogical practices within and outside of school…questioning and shedding previously cherished values and beliefs" [22], which provides the conditions to change pedagogy. It is this type of critical questioning that occurs through reflectively discursive activities which expand teacher frames of practice, developing the ontological security required for teachers to take purposeful action around pedagogy.
