Today we were introduced to the concept of the teacher as autonomous professional. To be an autonomous professional, the teacher combines the skills developed through training, such as lesson planning and constructing valid and reliable tests, with a bigger-picture basis of knowledge that allows the teacher to understand the whys and wherefores of his or her teaching practices. The teacher reflects on and learns from his or her own decisions, which empower him or her to act instead of react. As a reflective practitioner, the teacher deftly sidesteps the trap of trained incapacity. Trained incapacity is a quagmire for critical thinking in which the individual may, unfortunately, assume that there is only one fixed way of reaching a goal, for example, believing that selected response tests are the only way to assess student learning. As a critical thinker, I can, in turn, model critical thinking skills to my students with the desired result of inspiring them to be critical thinkers.
This is all great and I agree that as a teacher I should know why I am assigning a research paper instead of administering a selected response test. But how autonomous can I be? Are there not limiting factors? Curriculum could be a limiting factor. Law dictates that I teach certain topics to students at set times in their academic career. In the beginning, I will not have any say over the curriculum. And the curriculum itself may not see revisions for another ten years anyway. Federal and provincial politics can also limit a teacher’s capabilities. When parties in power tighten their budgets, funding to education may decrease, which may limit a teacher’s access to resources, increase class sizes, hamper programmes for students with exceptionalities, and so on. Speaking of teaching resources, are publishing companies not in competition for selling their text books? Who wins in this competition? Are schools that can only purchase the most affordable textbook really receiving the best? [Just as an aside: Is it ethical to make a profit on something that is a basic right, i.e. education?] Curriculum, budgets, and access to resources, just to name a few, are factors that may be beyond my control but will influence my capacity to teach. Choices are being made for me that will limit my autonomy.
Since this is my first entry, it may resemble more of a misguided rant. As I gain more insight into the bigger picture and hone my critical thinking, I will find my stance on the issues and my voice to express it. Read, respond, reflect, or reject this blog as you see fit.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"I will not have any say over the curriculum." This is a good example of what I'm talking about. The teacher technician is prepared to shrug off responsibility for curriculum and just implements what s/he is told. This is the case in several countries where teachers are part of the civil service -- you can walk into any classroom in the entire country, and if it is Tuesday, the 7th, then every student is on page 132 of the text.
ReplyDeleteBut in Alberta, teachers are part of a profession, not part of the bureaucracy. The mandated curriculum is quite vague, and leaves lots of room for teacher creativity, interpretation, and professional judgement. And the curriculum is largely written by teachers -- classroom professionals like oneself. Instead of waiting to be told what to do, the true professional gets him/herself appointed to the curriculum committees and changes the curriculum whenever they have problems with the current version. And the curriculum does not come down from god -- so even if it were imposed by the government with no input from teachers -- it would be up to those teachers who viewed themselves as autonomous professionals to organize with other teachers to stand up and DEMAND input; or take their complaints to the public and campaign in an election to change the government.... or etc. Sitting passively and waiting to be told what to do = technician. Participating in discussions and negotiations with others in the profession, and relevant stakeholers including government, to reach a concensus on what should be taught is entirely different matter. (Once everyone has agreed/compromised, then it is perfectly appropriate for a professional to be bound by what has been agreed to.)
This is a good point. As members of the teaching profession, we must not just sit back and go through the motions. It's easy for us to complain about the curriculum: how there's too much material to cover, how certain topics are unnecessary, etc. But really, we should take advantage of the fact that we can promote change by being proactive, by attending curriculum committees, as previously mentioned.
ReplyDelete