Teachers’ beliefs and continuing professional development
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231311304715 |
| Date | 15 March 2013 |
| Pages | 213-231 |
| Published date | 15 March 2013 |
| Author | Siebrich de Vries,Wim J.C.M. van de Grift,Ellen P.W.A. Jansen |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Teachers’ beliefs and continuing
professional development
Siebrich de Vries, Wim J.C.M. van de Grift and Ellen P.W.A. Jansen
Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen,
Groningen, The Netherlands
Abstract
Purpose – Teachers’ continuing professional development (CPD) should improve teacher quality and
teaching practices, though teachers vary in the extent to which they participate in CPD activities.
Because beliefs influence working and learning, and teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching
influence their instructional decisions, this study aims to explore the link between teachers’ beliefs
about learning and teaching and their participation in CPD.
Design/methodology/approach – This study features two belief dimensions (student and subject
matter orientation) and three types of CPD activities (updating, reflective, and collaborative).
Survey data from 260 Dutch secondary school teachers were collected and analyzed using structu ral
equation modeling.
Findings – Student-oriented beliefs relate positively to teachers’ participation in CPD: the more
student-oriented teachers are, the more they participate in CPD. No relationship emerges between
subject matter–oriented beliefs and CPD.
Practical implications – To intensify teachers’ participation in CPD and thereby improve teacher
quality and teaching practices, schools should emphasize a student orientation among their teachers.
Originality/value – The original empirical study examines the relationship between teachers’ beliefs
about learning and teaching and their participation in CPD and thus furthers understanding of factors
that influence teachers’ participation in CPD.
Keywords Secondary education, Teachers, Continuing professional development, Beliefs,
Education, The Netherlands
Paper type Research p aper
Introduction
The continuing professional development (CPD) of teachers provides an important
tactic for improving schools, increasing teacher quality, and improving student
learning (Day, 1999; Hargreaves, 2000; Opfer and Pedder, 2011; Verloop, 2003; Yates,
2007). Important CPD activities include updating knowledge and skills, reflection, and
collaboration with colleagues (Schraw, 1998; Timperley et al., 2007; Verloop, 2003); in
particular, reflection appears essential for professional growth (Eraut, 1994; Scho
¨n,
1983). Yet despite extensive research into the effective features of CPD (Diepstraten
et al., 2011; Timperley et al., 2007; Van Veen et al., 2010), as well as persistent efforts
by governments, school administrations, and educators to enhance participation in
CPD, teachers vary widely in the extent to which they participate (Aarts and
Waslander, 2008; Diepstraten et al., 2011; Van Driel, 2006; Vogels, 2009). And in
particular, compared with updating knowledge and skills or collaborating, teachers
seem to participate less often in reflective activities (Dijkstra, 2009; Kwakman, 2003;
Van Eekelen, 2005).
What can explain such variation? Substantial research highlights several factors,
both individual and environmental, that might determine teachers’ participation in
CPD (e.g. Kwakman, 2003; Runhaar et al., 2010). An important but largely neglected
factor is teachers’ own beliefs, which “are the best indicators of the decisions
individuals make throughout their lives” (Pajares, 1992, p. 307). Beliefs are critical
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol.51 No. 2, 2013
pp. 213-231
rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/09578231311304715
Received 29 February 2012
Revised 7 June 2012
23 July 2012
Accepted 25 July 2012
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
213
Teachers’ beliefs
and CPD
guides of thought and behavior (Borg, 2001), as well as filters through which people
screen new knowledge and experiences for meaning (Nesp or, 1987; Pajares, 1992).
Teachers’ beliefs about learning and teaching have often been subjects of research;
they relate closely to the instructional decisions that teachers make (Calderhead, 1996).
We posit in turn that a comparable relationship might exist between teachers’ beliefs
about learning and teaching and their own lear ning activities, or CPD.
Epistemological belief theory posits that adults’ working and learning are
interrelated and influenced by the same underlying beliefs (Schommer, 1998). Some
researchers even suggest some congruity between te achers’ beliefs about learning
and teaching and whether, how, and what teachers learn themselves (Bolhuis and
Voeten, 2004; Opfer and Pedder, 2011; Opfer et al., 2011). Yet research on teachers’
participation in CPD and their beliefs thus far has remained separate (Opfer and
Pedder, 2011), without sufficient empirical investigation of the link. We undertake
such an exploration while also distinguishing teachers’ beliefs about lear ning and
teaching as student or subject matte r oriented (Van Driel et al., 2007).
Theoretical framework
Teachers’ beliefs
A belief refers to “a proposition which may be consciously or unconsciously held, is
evaluative in that it is accepted as true by the individual, and is therefore imbued
with emotive commitment” (Borg, 2001, p. 186). Teachers’ beliefs about learning
and teaching thus represent propositions about learning and teaching that teachers
hold to be true. Such beliefs develop during the years teacher s spend at school – first
as students, then as student teachers and teachers (Bolhuis, 2000; De Vries, 2004;
Hargreaves, 2000; Kelchtermans, 2008). Over time and with more use, beliefs grow
robust, so the earlier a belief is acquired, the more difficult it is to alter (Murphy and
Mason, 2006; Pajares, 1992).
Furthermore, teachers’ beliefs about learning and te aching generally comprise two
orientations: subject matter vs student (Meirink et al., 2009; Van Driel et al., 2007). This
classification also has been described using other terms, suc h as content vs student
(Denessen, 1999), student learning vs transmission of knowledge by the te acher
(De Vries, 2004; Van Veen et al., 2001), traditional vs process-oriented (Bolhuis and
Voeten, 2004), traditional vs constructivist (Tondeur et al., 2008), or reception/direct
transmission vs constructivist (OECD, 2009). Regardless of the terminology, the
distinction refers to different views of learning and teaching methods. A subject
matter orientation implies traditional “transmission te aching,” which focusses on
the transmission of content about the subject matter (Hargreaves, 2000). In this case,
teachers play a central role as knowledge experts and deliverers of knowledge, ensure
calm and concentration in the classroom, and do not attend to the needs of the
individual students but instead treat the whole class as a kind of collective student.
In contrast, a student orientation reflects constructivist theories of know ledge and
learning, with focusses on the development of skills and competencies, active and
collaborative learning by students, and the specific differences between individual
students (Pieters and Verschaffel, 2003). Such constructive views of learning and
teaching demand a strong conceptual understanding of the subject matter by teachers,
whose wide repertoire of both general pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge
enable them to create powerful learning environments for students with different
backgrounds and educational levels (Borko and Putnam, 1996). Teachers today
often must fill both roles: knowledge expert and competent deliverer of knowledge,
214
JEA
51,2
To continue reading
Request your trial