C- Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
3.6 Teacher professionalism and teacher autonomy
Defining teacher autonomy is, as declared by Little (2000), problematic and different researchers’ offer different clarifications in the literature. In this study however, I am eager to establish the extent to which teachers are able to work through the available textbooks/materials of EFL, applying different pedagogical techniques in classrooms, and also practicing a certain degree of autonomy to increase their professionalism, and how this would be exhibited. The exercise of autonomy may rotate with ideas about professional freedom and self-directed professional growth (Benson, 2011, p.174, citing McGrath, 2000).
As indicated in the introduction chapter, the description of the term teacher autonomy followed by this study is the one stated by Huang (2005, p. 206) as the willingness, ability and freedom of the teacher to undertake the control of personal learning and teaching. Huang’s preference for a concise definition of teacher autonomy was drawn from several scholars who used the term and applied it within their own empirical studies such as Benson’s (2001), whose argument for a concise definition was linked to learner autonomy, and Barfield et al. (2002), who stated that teaching is always contextually situated and without self-autonomy, teachers cannot be entrusted with the work of promoting student autonomy.
The three terms Huang indicated in his definition of the concept of teacher autonomy - “willingness”, “capacity” and “freedom” – specifically lead to a measurement of how teachers in this study try to correlate these three dimensions of autonomy within the Saudi Arabian context. Huang’s idea of autonomy related to those three concepts, willingness, ability and freedom, seem to cover most needed aspects of teacher autonomy in order to show their professionalism which I try to make a link between the two terms, teacher professionalism and autonomy, in this study.
The three terms of Huang’s (2005) framework “willingness”, “capacity” and
“freedom” – according to Huang (2009, p.20) generally resemble to three dimensions of teacher autonomy that he thought are significant: “social-motivational, technical- psychological, and critical-political” “teaching” and “learning” correspond to the two interrelated domains of teachers’ classroom life: domain of teaching and domain of teacher-learning.
I chose Huang’s framework because it contains the most related aspect of teacher autonomy that I could relate in my study. As indicated previously in this thesis, the education policy in Saudi Arabia does not recognize the concept of autonomy or motivate teachers who are actually applying it inside classrooms. Such unfamiliarity of the concept or might be ignorance was because the system is so controlled and centralised that most teachers could not in fact practice autonomy with ease.
The three broad dimensions of teacher autonomy that Huang used to capture the clear picture of the concept of autonomy of teacher’s willingness, ability and freedom were actually related to teacher’s social-motivational, technical-psychological, and critical- political (Huang, 2009, p.20).
On my part in this study, I was hoping to correlate those three dimensions where I think teachers might try to maneuver around the available EFL materials/textbooks.
Teachers might read what fits their learning environment and apply what they think it is suitable for their students’ needs and such maneuver could possibly be a social motivational.
Teachers could be in a position where they could evaluate their current teaching materials, if any, and aim for providing a suitable teaching environment to satisfy the requirements of their jobs as teachers. They could possibly meet several constraints on applying their teaching methods and such constraints could be related to personal teaching or learning, difficulties in relation to students’ current level and teaching environment in schools.
I could read that such position of teachers in their professional evaluation of materials and their appreciation of individual differences among students was a sign of a technical- psychological dimension to fulfill their job requirements.
The last dimension according to Huang (2009) is the critical-political. I have indicated that the MoE in Saudi Arabia is the only provider of the education system and act as representative for the Saudi government that would like to provide a unit and uniform learning environment countrywide. The MoE has prescribed the EFL textbooks and asked teachers to follow it. The MoE has also established rules for teachers to work with such prescribed textbooks and indicated penalties, such as transferring their jobs from teaching to administration, for who does not apply them.
Therefore, such issue of the government needs might sometimes contradicts the learning environment of both teachers and learners and only teachers might read the proper learning situation that could be fitted within their varieties of contexts. I think teachers were able to some extent work differently, if needed, and plan a head and try to work through such rules and at the same time keep heed their learning needs.
Smith (2003) agrees with Huang’s dimensions and indicated that such definition addresses the three senses of teacher autonomy. Smith thinks it relates to the capacity for self-directed professional action, capacity for self-directed professional development and the freedom from control by others over both professional action and development.
Therefore, Huang (2009) thinks that the concept of “autonomy” is related to terms concerning the capacity for and/or willingness to engage in self-direction as indicated by Smith (2003) in language learning and teaching. Moreover, Huang believes that self- directed behaviour or psychology of it related to teachers’ ability and agency.
For the moment, it is sufficient to note that we may act, for example teach (exercise of agency), but do not necessarily have the capacity to take control over our acting/teaching (autonomy). (Huang, 2009, p. 20)
Usma (2007) indicates that Huang definition of teacher autonomy, willingness, ability and freedom, is integrated to conceptualise the discussion in the literature around the term teacher autonomy and could possibly presents one of the most recent and comprehensive definitions in the field.
However, Usma (2007, p.268) believes that teacher autonomy, motivation, and competence need to be clearly separated in future definitions and studies. He thinks that motivation and professional competence may function as factors that promote or constrain professional action, while teacher autonomy should be assumed either as a personal sense of freedom for professional action, or as the power to exercise control in different school matters. According to Usma (2007) Neglecting to separate teacher motivation, professional competence, and teacher autonomy, or merging them together into a definition of teacher autonomy, can generate confusion and lead to misinterpretations of the concept of teacher autonomy.
Usma (2007, p.269) also with the notion that separating teacher autonomy and teacher empowerment would lead to a clear definition of the concept. He stated that teacher empowerment allows teachers to be part of the decision-making within the education system and rather engage in collaboration with the school administration. Teacher autonomy on the other hand, can be conceptualised over the capacity to take exercise the control of teaching and assessment, materials or professional development taking account the school system and the overall learning aims.
According to Bandura (1997) the term “control” within teacher autonomy could refer to the ability to exert influence over those things that affect one’s own life in order to obtain or prevent determined results. Moreover, the term “control” in the context of teachers’ professional autonomy needs to be comprehended as “a question of collective decision-making rather than individual choice” (Benson, 1996, p. 33; See also Benson, 2011).
Usma (2007, p. 270, citing Contreras, 1997) indicated that teacher autonomy should not be defined as further obligations specified to teachers as a way to hold them more accountable for their job or as a strategy for the state to reduce its obligations towards school communities. Teacher autonomy refers to the right of the teacher to exert initiative and carry out professional action according to school stakeholders’ needs and based on the necessary conditions of success.
Even with the highly regarded importance of teachers, not everybody fully concurs with the consideration that teachers need to exercise autonomy or what would constitute such an exercise in the teaching profession. For this reason, the approach given to the latter statement of Huang’s framework of autonomy depends on the specific model of teaching professionalism.
The current debate in the UK, according to Thomas (2012), is concerned with the professionalism of teachers and whether teaching is considered to be a profession or a craft compared to other professions, like the medical profession, and how much autonomy teachers should enjoy from the state. It also concerns the role of teachers and students in relation to knowledge, as stated by Bash (2005) and Goodson (2003).
Thomas (2012) used the term ‘professionalism’ as a descriptor of a combination of teachers’ specific capabilities and knowledge, and the purpose and ethical underpinnings of their work, the extent to which they are able to exercise independent and critical judgement, their role in shaping and leading changes in their field, and their relationship to policy makers. Thomas (2012) statement of teachers’
independency regarding their practice and knowledge agrees with Haung’s (2005) models for teacher autonomy that relies on their willingness, ability and freedom to undertake the control of personal teaching and learning, which is the present study focus.
The policy of the English Secretary of State for Education, (Gove, 2013), for example, mentioned in his speech about teachers in charge, at the National College for Teaching and Leadership:
This is a great opportunity for teachers to take control of the education debate – the profession is now being empowered to demonstrate what genuinely gets results and generate the data which will determine what evidence-based policy really looks like.
He also affirms that teachers as professionals are entitled to their choices regarding their profession, not the stakeholders or instructors or media:
Because public perceptions of the teaching profession rest, not on what politicians or OFSTED inspectors or the media say, but on what teachers do.
The Secretary of State also admits that he agrees with establishing an independent college that supports only the profession of teaching:
There is a growing consensus that teachers should emulate other professions, and set up a new Royal College – like the Royal College of Surgeons or Paediatricians – identifying, exemplifying and defining best practice in the teaching profession.
Therefore, the process of stimulating the professional commitment of teachers requires national governments and leaders of schools to be willing to increase the number of teachers. The curricula, on the other hand, should encourage the growth of professional self-worth and awareness of teachers who are still being trained, and in this way fully prepare them to coach students.
It is also fair to assume high levels of responsibility with regards to accountability, quality control of their profession, curriculum innovation, as well as the development and improvement of practical and realistic knowledge of both learning and teaching.
Therefore, it is clear that teachers are required to achieve a high standard of professionalism. This is fully supported by the assumptions stated and discussed by Snoek (2010) with regards to teachers and the overall learning process. Putting all of these into consideration, in order to maintain a high level of professionalism, teachers need to be given a desired opportunity to exercise a degree of autonomy. This will enable them to reach a high standard of professionalism.
The success of any school system largely depends on the teachers’ own professional development and their responsiveness to the learners’ eagerness and needs. To achieve this, we need the ability to learn and define consequences from our own experiences and therefore balance the much complementary dimensions associated with both action and reflection, not forgetting networking and the idea to exercise a degrees of autonomy (Altrichter and Krainer, 1996).
According to Stenhouse (1975), this would be realised by the “continuous prolonging of basic competencies by the means of systematic self-study” and their general adaptation to the constant change. Hoyle (1975) introduced the term ‘professionality’.
At this time, he simply used it to outline two separate aspects of the professional lives of teachers: professionality and professionalism.
In the same year, Hoyle further explained and clarified the distinction of the terms as those which are related to status elements of the work of teachers, he termed’
professionalism’, and the elements of the teachers’ job which comprises of the skills, knowledge and professional procedures that teachers always use in their course of duty he defined as ‘professionality’.
The two models of professionality available are the ‘extended’ and ‘restricted’ models (Hoyle, 1975, p.318). The characteristics that are considered to explain the two hypothetical models led to the creation of what can be seen as being on a continuum, with a model of intuition and experience and is fully guided by limited perspective which is classroom-based and which takes into serious consideration the daily practicalities of teaching which is of a ‘restricted’ professional.
On the other hand, the characteristics associated with the ‘extended’ professionality tries to explain a wider visualization of what education entails, by valuing the theory that undermines pedagogy and the consideration of rationally-based and intellectual approaches to the teaching job (Evans, 2007). The latter statement of Hoyle (1975), introduced by the current policy makers, that touches on the professional development of teachers, integrates into the daily practices of schools and gives teachers a broader recognition as the key members of the modern educational professional organisation.
This also includes their teaching roles.
Therefore, schools are viewed as learning organisations, and teachers, who are recognised as ‘reflective practitioners’, are highly regarded as the major playmakers.
Additional emphasis given to the teaching profession focuses on the teachers’
secondary roles forms part of the on-going modernisation of the teaching profession.
All these result in teachers being considered as innovators, researchers, people who receive feedback from colleges, principals’ collaborators, active colleagues and as those who promote the concept largely known as “teacher leadership”. (European, 2010, p.191). According to Usma (2007), an increased level of decision-making by teachers inside classrooms is not an automatic indication of increased teacher autonomy, or at least acquire the choice of autonomy in any needed educational situation inside the classroom.
This is because even with regards to this, there is still a need to instil new teacher responsibilities and unconditional support that, in the long run, drive the professionality of teachers. In this regard, it is now upon policy makers and educational administrators to recognise and upgrade the complex process involved in teacher learning and in this way provide necessary and realistic conditions that enable teachers to succeed in their improved responsibilities facing the students’ needs and enthusiasm (Usma, 2007).
The latter discussion implies that policy makers also have a significant role in creating a successful learning system as they are the people who set references for teacher training programmes. For instance, if they only train teachers while providing them with only the basic teaching materials without ever allowing them to practice any form of independent thinking, the teachers produced will not be sufficiently competent.