Conference Agenda

Changes and challenges in, and expectations of society call for ongoing professional development of teachers. However, in many schools this cannot be taken for granted (Burner, 2018; OECD, 2020, Timperley & Parr, 2005). Many governmental, local or institutional policies aimed at stimulating teachers’ professional developmenthave a limited impact, resulting in professional development that for many teachers depends on unconscious, fragmented, informal and unplanned learning activities (Korthagen, 2017; Koffeman, 2021; OECD, 2019).

To reach a deeper understanding of the causes and complexities of this problem, casual loop diagrams (Salmon et al, 2022) can be a helpful tool, as they visualize how different elements and processes in an organisation are interrelated and either strengthen of weaken one another. Causal loop diagrams originate from the field of system thinking where they are used to understand wicked problems in complex systems (Bore & Wright, 2009; Groff, 2013; Vermaak, 2016). Causal loop diagrams can illustrate how elements like the structure of the profession and of schools, cultures in schools, collegial dynamics, etc are interconnected and can reinforce one another in either positive or negative ways.

From our observations in schools and from many discussions with teachers and school leaders, we developed causal loop diagrams that evolve around teacher professional learning, and we validated these in the literature. Our next step was to validate the causal loop diagrams in practices in schools through focus group discussions in a variety of schools and across school sectors.

The resulting causal loop diagrams illustrate what the key elements in school structures and school culture are and can how these elements and structures are interrelated. While the diagrams illustrate the complexity of the process of professional development in schools, at the same time the visual representations of the causal loop diagrams can support teachers and schools to identify patterns that hinder a systemic approach for ongoing professional development, thus strengthening awareness and opening up opportunities for addressing these patterns in schools.

Recognizing social and cultural diversity in educational research requires a shift from perceiving phenomena as simple linear processes to complex and unique assemblages of diverse actors (see Deleuze & Guattari, 1987). For example, the concept of intersectionality—that interacting sociocultural factors shape identity and experiences—reflects complexity (Hill Collins and Bilge, 2016). If teachers are to support students’ complex, intersectional identities they must learn to see and accept this complexity rather than generalize students by gender, race, ethnicity, social class, or other characteristics. In other words, shifting perspectives towards complexity enables space for diversity. In this paper, I describe a case study of teacher professional development (PD) that highlights the difficulties teachers have in perceiving and accepting a specific aspect of complexity: indeterminacy. The findings have implications for the skills and support teachers need to be successful in diverse classrooms.

In the study presented here, I considered interactions with complexity from a design lens. As a designer, a teacher learns and practices in a classroom amidst complex nested systems. Design calls for seeing beyond traditional, linear practice, experimenting with new approaches, and adjusting those approaches in response to feedback.

Theoretical Background

Scholars have called for considering teaching practice from a complexity lens (e.g., Clarke & Dempster, 2020; Sherman & Teemant, 2021; Strom & Viesca, 2021). Instead of simplifying teaching practice in an effort to find “best practices” or implement an intervention “with fidelity,” complexity demands a recognition of the multitude of factors that interact and affect teaching and learning. Rather than standardizing practice to serve the majority, complexity highlights difference, including working with intersectional identities of teachers and students (Warr & Wakefield, 2022). Working effectively amidst complexity requires accepting that it is impossible to obtain complete information on a situation and that there is no “right solution” or “right action” to take: the situation is “indeterminate” (Buchanan, 1992). Design hinges on this indeterminacy.

Many scholars have turned to design as a way to frame the type of learning and practice teachers are asked to engage in (see Warr & Mishra, 2021). Designers thrive in complexity because of the responsive nature of their work; a designer develops their practice in response to a particular situation, adapting as it changes (Schön, 1983). They operate in complexity through cycles of action and reflection which Donald Schön described as “reflection-in-action.” Designers “construct a theory of a unique case” (Schön, 1983, p. 68) and place the theory on the situation, beginning a “conversation with the situation”. The situation consists of “a system of actants in interaction that is experienced by the subject as a unique and inseparable whole” (Clarà, 2013, p. 119) akin to Deleuze and Guattari’s (1987) assemblage. As a system of agentic entities, the situation “talks back” to the designer, providing feedback that informs future moves. This type of experimentation becomes a kind of inquiry where thinking, doing, and learning come together. A similar perspective can be seen in Jahnke’s (2011, 2013) critical hermeneutics, where design is seen as an act of interpretation and meaning making. Jahnke’s view emphasizes the dynamic relationship between the designer and the situation as well as a consideration of how the designer is changed in the process.