Conference Agenda

Innovation in Teacher Professional Learning in Europe Research, Policy and Practice is a book due to be published by Routledge in 2023, providing an overview of teacher professional learning and development in 14 European countries. The authors participating in this symposium will provide an insight into current policy and practice relating to PLD in their countries. Taken together, the three symposia in this series will enable an up-to-date commentary on the state of PLD in Europe.

During recent decades we can track a path going from teacher education as In-service training (INSET) to Continuing Professional Development (CPD) to Professional Learning and Development (Ostinelli and Crescentini, 2021). The first is usually conceived as an occasional complement to initial teacher education; the second is a continuing process typified by transmissive approaches (Timperley, 2011); the third, finally, includes learning under the form of evolutionary processes capable of generating professional expertise and mastery (Dreyfus and Dreyfuss, 2008), focusing on the teacher as an individual professional but forming part of a network of professional learners capable of providing adequate answers to the rapid and sudden changes affecting contemporary schooling.

Teacher professional learning in every country analysed here has been classified as pertaining to one or other of these categories. However, each school system also has its particularities, both in defining its approach to teacher professional learning and from a cultural/structural point of view. Moreover, the countries participating in this study are also different in terms of population, going from small nations like Wales to larger ones such as France or Italy.

The information here proposed can give a good background for future deepening and more precise studies on various issues concerning teacher professional learning. Questions of relevance for all the countries include the increasing prominence of informal professional learning, the incentives for participating in teacher professional development (including leadership development, Jones, 2022) and how these may be aligned with needs, conditions and resources, and the issue of compulsoriness, in particular, the balance between prescription and option. Coaching (Kise, 2017), mentoring (Geeraerts et al., 2015) and professional learning networks (Handscomb and Brown, 2022) are associated practices that also deserve attention. Another important issue is how to balance and integrate in a lifewide-oriented organized approach what is performed autonomously and informally by teachers as professionals who take responsibility for their own learning.

Comparing different educational systems is a task that can sometimes appear artificial. In fact, every one of them grew up from different histories and systemic conditions (Ostinelli, 2009). For performing this duty, we renounced to the use of “sharp” descriptive models, preferring a broader and flexible constructivist/complexivist teacher professional learning (PL) framework (Ostinelli and Crescentini, 2021). Based on these criteria, we defined a set of indicators: needs, validity, organic structure, sustainability, support, professional learning, frame, form and effectiveness. Starting from these indicators we created an online 30 item survey, and we submitted it from February to September 2022 to the presenting authors of this tri-symposium. This choice was done mainly for reasons of opportunity (in particular the high number of participant countries and of different languages spoken). However, it relied also on the argument that every author, even if from a subjective standpoint, is an expert of her/his national educational system, and in particular of teacher PL. We used frequency and Likert scales and we asked the respondents to provide further details, where appropriate, through open-ended questions. Therefore, our study has to be considered of explorative character. The resulting information can be an outline for further qualitative and quantitative investigations.

Ostinelli, G. (2009). Teacher Education in Italy, Germany, England, Sweden and Finland. European Journal of Education, 44(2), 291-308. Ostinelli, G., & Crescentini, A. (2021). Policy, culture and practice in teacher professional development in five European countries. A comparative analysis. Professional Development in Education, 1-17.

In this chapter, we focus on approaches to professional learning and development (PLD) in Denmark since the 2014 national school reform. We describe how a formal competence development approach dominated in the initial phase, and how this was gradually supplemented by a top-down-oriented teacher collaboration approach within the framework of professional learning communities (PLCs) (Qvortrup, 2016). As this type of teacher collaboration is often characterised by teachers sharing experiences, discussing student learning, and/or exchanging instructional strategies (de Jong et al., 2022), a central assumption behind this emphasis on collaboration was that collaboration would lead to increased on-the-job learning through feedback and reflection. Neither of the recent PLD approaches, however, seems to have had a significant positive impact on students’ performance. In order to contribute to new ways of thinking about teacher PLD, we zoom in on teacher collaboration as part of the recent PLD effort in Denmark and analyse an empirical example of teacher collaboration in a Danish school. In the example, we follow a series of collaborative events that revolve around two teachers meeting to plan a lesson, the unfolding of the lesson, and the talks and encounters that follow the lesson. The analysis is informed by a complexity-oriented process theoretical perspective (Hernes, 2008, 2014) and it highlights how potential learning opportunities that arise as part of the teachers’ collaborative events do not actualize because the events mainly revolve around the production of consensus, legitimisation of and adaptation to current practices and mutual support. From our analysis the chapter advocates an approach according to which teacher collaboration and PLD should be observed as a result of emerging processes of organisation and complexity management, rather than being the result of top-down management decisions. An implication is that PLD programmes that take this observation into account should be structured around an understanding of the importance of supporting and sustaining PLD processes that emerge as part of the school organisation.

de Jong, L., Meirink, J., & Admiraal, W. (2022). School-Based Collaboration as a Learning Context for Teachers: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Educational Research, 112, 101927. Hernes, T. (2008). Understanding Organization as Proces—Theory for a Tangled World. Routledge. Hernes, T. (2014). A Process Theory of Organization. University Press. Qvortrup, L. (2016). Det ved vi om professionelle læringsfællesskaber. (1. ed.). Frederikshavn: Dafolo. [English Title: What We Know about Professional Learning Communities].

REssential to Finnish education context is decentralisation and autonomy of municipalities, schools and teachers (Niemi, 2015). Therefore, teachers are active participants in the design of local curricula and courses. Teachers in Finland are required to have a master’s degree. An essential characteristic of teacher education in Finland has been its emphasis on research (Tirri, 2014). This orientation supports teachers in the local planning and assessment processes. Moreover, the research orientation supports student teachers in developing professional teacher identity and agency in their work (Niemi, 2015). The in-service education or support for the professional learning of teachers is the responsibility of the municipalities and cities in Finland. Teachers must participate three days per year to professional learning. Therefore, municipalities have organised short in-service courses for teachers. In addition to three in-service days, there is 120 hours for co-design time during the academic year for co-design, consultations, and for home-school co-operation. According to Kumpulainen (2017) and National Agency of Education (2019) the Finnish teachers and principals have participated actively in voluntary professional learning, typically yearly 80% - 91% of various teacher groups. Teachers’ professional learning is supported in various school, district and national level projects or activities. At school level, teachers in Finland, are seen as developers of the school community and school culture (Finnish National Board for Education [NBE], 2014). This idea of teachers as developers could be interpreted as an activity of a professional learning community (PLC) of teachers (Webb et al., 2009). In addition to development projects there are several teacher networks, which support teachers’ professional learning. One important current teachers’ professional learning innovation is s a tutor-teacher model . A tutor teacher is a teacher, who has fewer lesson hours than other teachers but supports other teachers in their own classrooms to use digital tools in education. National Agency for Education has been responsible for the development of tutor-teacher’s competencies and network of tutor-teachers As a summary, it is possible to recognise, how the outcomes of research on teachers’ professional development and learning are aimed to implement to Finnish teachers’ professional learning activities. The development project or professional learning communities activities are often long-term by nature (Oliveira, 2010). Teacher led development projects and PLCs support teachers to take an active role in their professional learning (Garet et al., 2001) and connect their professional learning to the classrooms and practice context (Van den Bergh et al., 2015).

Webb, R. et al.. (2009) Professional learning communities and teacher well‐being? A comparative analysis of primary schools in England and Finland. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 405-422 Van den Bergh, L. et al. (2015). Teacher learning in the context of a continuing professional development programme: A case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47(1), 142–150. Tirri, K. (2014). The last 40 years in Finnish teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 40(5), 600–609. Oliveira, A. W. (2010). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422–453. Niemi, H. (2015). Teacher Professional Development in Finland: Towards a More Holistic Approach. Psychology, Society, & Education, 7(3), 279-294. National Board of Education (NBE) (2014). The National Core Curriculum for Basic Education. Helsinki: NBE. Lavonen J., et al. (2020). A Collaborative Design for a Finnish Teacher Education Development Programme. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, 9(2), 241-262. Kumpulainen, K. (2017). Opettajat ja rehtorit Suomessa 2016 [Teachers and principals in finland 2016]. Raportit ja selvitykset 2017:2. Helsinki: Opetushallitus Garet. M et al.. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Education Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.

In Estonia, the current success in education (i.e. PISA) is a result of long-term systemic work on curriculum development, teacher initial education, continuing professional learning. and the preparation of futures scenarios of national and educational development. The concepts of “teacher education” and Lifelong learning (LLL) underline curriculum development, engagement of teacher-students into research, reflective practice and cultural aspects. Estonia enjoyed a well-developed and nationwide regulated and funded CPD model for teacher LLL during the Soviet epoch. After regaining independence, the locus of governance of the system started to move itself towards schools and teachers. Expected Teacher competencies depend on the teacher qualification (beginner, teacher, Master Teacher, etc.) and include PLD mastery and e-learning/teaching. Teacher professionalism includes also self-development, ethics and social skills. The main changes in Estonian teacher lifelong professional learning (LLPL) model are: a transition from the original Soviet teaching/pedagogical organization to a needs- and demands-lead model, and a total change of the learning-teaching environment as result of technological developments. The pandemic period appears to be a good accelerator of processes and models, leading to develop pervasive practices, whose impact is already visible in Estonian schools.

Sarv, E.-S. (2014). A Status Paper on School Teacher Training in Estonia. Journal of International Forum of Educational Research, http://ejournal.ifore.in Vol.1 No.2 July-December 2014 ISSN: 2349-2708 Sarv, E.-S.; Krabi, K. (2015). INNOVE Report on the Results of the Visit to Georgia July 27–August 7, 2015 and Recommendations on Teacher Training: Report to UNICEF-GEORGIA. 81 pp. Sarv, E-S., Krabi, K. (2015). Perspectives on Teacher Education: core issues through virtual learning experience. (Virtual learning site.) Tallinn: Foundation INNOVE. http://kristiinakrabi.wix.com/teachereducation Sarv, E-S., Rõuk, V. (2020). Estonian Curriculum: Becoming Independent, in Kesture, I., Sarv, E-S., Stonkuviene, I. (Eds.) Pedagogy And Educational Sciences In The Post-Soviet Baltic States, 1990–2004: Changes And Challenges, Riga, University of Latvia, pp. 84-101. https://doi.org/10.22364/bahp-pes.1990-2004.05