teachers knowledge assignment expert

• Career Center

Position Statements

• Submit a Resolution
• All Position Statements
• NCTE Process for Adopting Official Guidelines and Short Documents

Recognizing Teacher Experts and Their Paths to Expertise

Teacher experts are teachers who have continued teaching in a P–12 classroom while also serving the field and growing their educational knowledge and pedagogy continually throughout their long careers. Teacher experts have many roles within their schools and the greater education community. They are often called upon as formal mentors to early career teachers, and, informally, their colleagues seek their wisdom and expertise throughout the school day. They are asked to serve on school, district, and state committees for curriculum development and educational reform. They seek out professional development opportunities to attend, and they often present at conferences. They are longtime, active members of professional organizations, and they serve on boards and committees within these organizations. Teacher experts often author professional articles and books and are constantly sought out to join educational research projects. Teacher experts serve children and families in their classrooms while also serving their professional communities and the field at large with the work they do outside of their classrooms. The journeys to becoming a teacher expert are varied and wide. And because so much of the work that teacher experts are called to do happens outside their classrooms but during the school day, they need support from their schools and professional communities so that they can engage in the work that makes our field richer and more knowledgeable because they are included.

In the current climate, which deprofessionalizes P–12 classroom teachers, many are leaving the profession (García & Weiss, 2019). One important reason is the failure to recognize classroom teachers as experts equal to their peers in higher education, administrators, and stakeholders outside the field. The specialized knowledge of classroom teacher experts (including but not limited to content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, relationship building, classroom management, culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogy, social-emotional learning, and information and communication technology), which can only be obtained from sustained professional learning throughout a teacher’s career, is often absent from curriculum development teams, professional communities, and leadership groups.

The National Council of Teachers of English has recognized the specialized role of teacher knowledge and expertise in past statements and policies:

• The July 2019 policy statement, Shifting from Professional Development to Professional Learning: Centering Teacher Empowerment , lays out key components of professional learning, including becoming “empowered educators, visionary leaders, and inspired knowledge producers through professional learning and cultural competency.”
• In the 2012 Resolution on Teacher Expertise and the Common Core State Standards , NCTE delineated the classroom practices that strong and knowledgeable teachers use effectively in their instruction.
• During the implementation of national policies and mandates such as No Child Left Behind and Common Core State Standards, NCTE reminded stakeholders of “the wisdom of NCTE members with deep knowledge of effective teaching and assessment practices influential at every stage of curricula, assessment, and standards development” ( Resolution on Challenging Current Education Policy and Affirming Literacy Educators’ Expertise , November 20, 2011).

The specialized knowledge needed by classroom teachers is a core component of who teacher experts are. However, teacher experts also pursue further professional learning, growth, and leadership opportunities that extend beyond the teaching and learning inside their classrooms and into their schools, districts, communities, and profession at large.

NCTE considers teacher experts to be practicing classroom teachers who develop, refine, and cultivate their practice while also serving in collaborative roles and leadership positions. Further, NCTE encourages other professional organizations, administrators and policymakers, and higher education professionals to promote the role of teacher expert as an aspiration; to support teacher experts with opportunities to learn, grow, and lead while fairly compensating them for their time and energy; and to celebrate valuable educators who have earned the classification of teacher expert.

Definition of Teacher Expert

While NCTE celebrates veteran teachers who have given decades to their classroom teaching careers, being a veteran teacher is not the sole definition of a teacher expert. Instead, teacher experts can be defined as teachers who continue teaching in their P–12 classrooms while also making a commitment to intentional professional growth that is sustained over time and years of practice (in and beyond classroom spaces). They

• continually hone the art and craft of teaching by studying their own practice;
• engage in teaching that responds effectively to particular moments in the context of their classrooms and work with students;
• foster authentic, equitable, and caring relationships with students, their families, and the communities in which they teach; and
• seek leadership opportunities and professional learning within their schools and elsewhere while remaining active classroom teachers.

However, beyond exhibiting these components of excellent teaching, teacher experts chart a pathway that pursues further professional learning and growth that impacts their teaching and learning inside the classroom and in their profession at large.

Pathways to Teacher Expertise

Pathways to becoming a teacher expert are individual and varied. An educator who is committed to sustained professional learning and reflective practice, whether through formal or informal design, may be a teacher expert. Some examples of pathways to teacher expertise include but are not limited to

• classroom-based action research;
• coursework and advanced degrees;
• mentorship of early career educators;
• involvement in instructional leadership teams;
• leadership in curriculum committees;
• leadership in professional organizations;
• National Board Certification for Teachers; and
• publication in the field of education.

The keystone of a teacher expert is their impact on teaching and learning with students directly and more generally in the profession while remaining active in their classroom.

Contributions of Teacher Experts

We recognize teacher experts as contributors and leaders in the school sites and local communities, as well as at district, state, and national levels. Teacher experts, while continuing to teach in P–12 classrooms, can additionally serve in a variety of roles that demonstrate their curricular leadership and expertise, including

• coaching and collegial support;
• model teaching;
• participating in community initiatives;
• collectively constructing knowledge with the community;
• mentor teaching for student teachers or participate in mentorship programs for novice teachers (induction);
• department chairing and curricular leadership roles at the school and/or district level;
• coadministrative/administrative/teacher on special assignment role;
• teaching in teacher education programs;
• conducting action research in their classrooms/departments/schools or participating in research projects with education researchers;
• authoring/coauthoring classroom-based inquiry and reflections on practice in practitioner-focused and scholarly journals;
• editing practitioner-focused and scholarly journals;
• authoring books drawing from their expertise for a variety of audiences; and
• participating in national, state-wide, and regional professional organizations (e.g., conference presentations, committee work, leadership positions).

While teacher experts can serve in a variety of roles, including those listed above, it is critical to recognize the strength and importance of creating sustainable structures that allow teacher experts to remain teaching in P–12 classrooms for at least part of their professional work. This might involve creative partnerships with teacher educators or colleagues including job-sharing, administrative or curricular leadership roles that come with partial course releases, and compensation/funding for professional learning opportunities.

Teacher experts can also share their leadership in a variety of ways, including

• teaching (at P–12, higher education, and teacher education levels);
• participation in school/district decision-making processes;
• community engagements;
• one-on-one or group mentoring relationships;
• publications (blogs, journal articles, books);
• facilitating professional learning sessions;
• local, state, and national conference presentations;
• social media presence.

In supporting teacher experts in leading within and from their classrooms, we challenge notions that expertise necessitates an exit from ongoing P–12 teaching and recognize the power and continued relevance of classroom teaching to developing professional expertise.

Supporting and Sustaining Teacher Experts

Teachers are the key to school communities. Specifically, teacher experts engage in continuous professional learning and growth that supports the foundation of the school community and educational community at large. With this, the educational field must recognize their essential role in supporting and sustaining teacher experts within the community. Furthermore, the field must understand their responsibility to dismantle oppressive structures to provide sustaining, affirming, and nurturing environments for the celebration and growth of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) teacher experts along the course of their careers—from recruitment into teacher education; through preservice and entry into the profession; and in early, mid, and late stages of their careers.

A vital part of supporting teacher expertise is creating sustainable structures that promote teachers staying in classrooms to develop their expertise. This requires efforts not only to recruit teachers into the field but to retain them. Efforts must be made particularly both to recruit and retain Black, Indigenous, Latinx, Asian American, Pasifika, and multiracial teachers given research that indicates their greater effectiveness with all students (Cherng & Halpin, 2016) and the increased rate of push-out for these teachers beginning as early as teacher education (Mawhinney & Rinke, 2019).

Therefore, teacher experts call upon the field of education to dismantle current structures that create barriers to the development and well-being of teacher experts and co-develop the following:

NCTE and Other Professional Organizations

• Promote a policy that each appointed Council committee must include a practicing P–12 classroom teacher.
• Actively recruit and support teacher experts’ writing in spaces such as journals, professional books, and articles.
• Encourage affiliates, P–12 conferences, and sections to include teacher experts in any member group.
• Respect that the availability of teacher experts differs from that of higher education colleagues and should be taken into account when involving teacher experts on committees and in other working groups.
• Nominate teacher experts to assume leadership roles and responsibilities within all Council governing bodies.
• Include teacher experts in mentoring programs.
• Elicit expertise of teacher experts when policy shifts occur at the national level and within the organization.

Administrators and Policymakers

• Use this resolution to support teachers in their professional journey to become and continue to grow as teacher experts.
• Provide time, space, and resources for continued growth and leadership.
• Recognize and respect the multiple roles a teacher expert embodies.
• Consult teacher experts in developing and implementing teaching methods and curricula.
• Consult and include teacher experts in decision-making processes at the school, district, state, and national levels.
• Respect each teacher’s level of experience and expertise.
• Advocate for teacher self-care and structures for community care and sustainability.
• Shift the discourse around veteran teachers as resisters/resistance to change.

Districts/Educational Systems

• Count service toward continuing “units” or pay scale—formalize ways to develop professionally and support development of teacher expertise.
• Develop formal partnerships with universities/colleges in multiple forms (mentor teacher pipelines, distinguished faculty in residence—teachers and teacher educators).
• Make structural shifts to teacher-on-special-assignment/instructional coach/ administrative experiences that support flexible movements back and forth into and out of classroom spaces to support students and colleagues.
• Include teachers in decision-making processes through improved communication and partnerships between teachers, administrators, and school board members.

Teacher Educators

• Partner with teacher experts in teaching and research, recognizing their credibility and expertise in the field.
• Collaborate fully with teacher experts and share equally in the creation, recognition, and compensation of research and scholarship.

Note: These partnerships/collaborations can be particularly powerful if teacher educators who keep their P–12 credentials current can serve as co-teachers/substitute teachers/collaborators with classroom-based teacher experts to allow the teacher experts time to engage in scholarly work while providing a consistent, cohesive learning experience for students.

Teacher Educator Programs in Colleges/Universities

• Establish/develop clinical lines—“distinguished faculty in residence” = teachers with experience who may not have a doctorate.
• Encourage bidirectional movement—moving flexibly between P–12 and university teaching.

RESEARCH SUPPORTING THIS STATEMENT

Berliner, D. (1993). Teacher expertise. In A. Pollard & J. Bourne (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the primary school (pp. 83–89). Routledge.

Berry, B., Johnson, D., & Montgomery, D. (2005). The power of teacher leadership. Educational Leadership , 62 (5), 56–60.

Cherng, H.-Y. S., & Halpin, P. F. (2016). The importance of minority teachers: Student perceptions of minority versus white teachers. Educational Researcher , 45 (7), 407–420.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Chapter 8: Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education , 24 (1), 249–305.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2015). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. Teachers College Press.

Crowther, F., Ferguson, M., & Hann, L. (2009). Developing teacher leaders: How teacher leadership enhances school success . Corwin.

Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2019). The reflective educator’s guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn through practitioner inquiry. Corwin.

Feiman-Nemser, S. (2012). Teachers as learners. Harvard Education Press.

García, E., & Weiss, E. (2019, March 26). The teacher shortage is real, large and growing, and worse than we thought. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/the-teacher-shortage-is-real-large-and-growing-and-worse-than-we-thought-the-first-report-in-the-perfect-storm-in-the-teacher-labor-market-series/

Harris, A., & Muijs, D. (2004). Improving schools through teacher leadership. McGraw-Hill.

Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership redefined: An evocative context for teacher leadership. School Leadership & Management , 23 (4), 421–430.

Mawhinney, L., & Rinke, C. R. (2019). There has to be a better way . Rutgers University Press.

Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2003). Teacher leadership—Improvement through empowerment? An overview of the literature. Educational Management & Administration , 31 (4), 437–448.

Pine, G. J. (2008). Teacher action research: Building knowledge democracies. SAGE.

York-Barr, J., & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research , 74 (3), 255–316.

STATEMENT AUTHORS

This document was composed by the following working committee:

Tiana Silvas, chair, New York City Public Schools, NY

Melissa Guerrette, Oxford Elementary School, MSAD 17, Oxford, ME

Betina Hsieh, California State University Long Beach, CA

Jennifer Ochoa, New York City Public Schools, NY

Islah Tauheed, New York City Public Schools, NY

Deborah Vriend Van Duinen, Hope College, Holland, MI

Teacher Reviewers

Ella Farinas, Pasadena Unified School District, CA

Stephany Garcia, Long Beach Unified School District, CA

Shiela Lee, New York City Public Schools, NY

Karen Maria Rowe, Black River Public School, Holland, MI

Nekia Wise, New York City Public Schools, NY

This position statement may be printed, copied, and disseminated without permission from NCTE.

Why do we see teacher expertise as needing knowledge, skill and judgement (even though most people seem to focus on just one of these)?

In their chapter in the second edition of the Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance , Stigler and Miller claim that “most teacher education and professional development programs for teachers have focused on making teachers more knowledgeable; few actually give teachers opportunity to practice the skills of teaching” (2018, p. 441). Recently, with the growth of interest in coaching and teaching techniques , some approaches to teachers’ development have moved in the opposite direction to focus on classroom skills more explicitly. But these often then seem to place less emphasis on teachers’ theoretical knowledge—as if we can’t have both. And both types generally say little about the importance of teachers’ judgement and intuition.

The need for judgement

In some approaches to education improvement, judgement is ruled out entirely. Interventions require “fidelity” and are designed to prevent teachers from deviating from the script, driven by the fear of the “lethal mutations” that often arise when we allow individual teachers and school leaders to make their own choices. Of course, this fear is real and important ; given a choice, many teachers and school leaders do indeed make bad choices. Intuition is often wrong, and we are right to be sceptical of where it leads us (Kahneman, 2012). So, a plausible approach is to prescribe ever more tightly, specifying and policing the kinds of compliance required to get faithful implementation of an “evidence-based” programme. Some school leaders also follow this route, mandating “non-negotiables” that all teachers must comply with.

Unfortunately, such approaches to faithful programme implementation have been found to have small effects at best (Lortie-Forgues & Inglis, 2019). Aside from their impoverished view of the complexity of teaching and undermining of teachers’ autonomy—with consequent negative effects on motivation and joy in work—attempts to improve practice by tightening compliance are, on average, simply not very effective.

(It should be noted that there may be some groups of teachers or contexts for which these prescriptive approaches are more effective. In particular, the expertise reversal effect [Kalyuga et al., 2003], whereby novices generally need more structure than experts, may be relevant here.)

In the Great Teaching Toolkit (GTT), we see teachers’ judgement and intuition as crucial. So much of the complexity of classroom interaction depends on subtle choices teachers make, mostly below the level of conscious awareness. No one can observe classroom practice without being struck by the importance and intricacy of context; the very same practice can be right in one situation and wrong in another. It follows that the way teachers adapt techniques to their context is a feature, not a bug. Adaptation is the lifeblood of effective teaching (Hatano & Inagaki,1986). Intuition becomes something we have to work with, to develop and celebrate, not to squash.

And, it turns out, this is a feature of most other kinds of expertise too (Ericsson, 2018). Experts see things differently: they focus on the underlying patterns and structure in a situation, not its surface features; they pay attention to what really matters; they internalise the causal mechanisms that determine outcomes and act on them directly; they predict consequences and evaluate their own impact against these sophisticated counterfactuals; in doing this, they draw on a depth of experience, recognising patterns, constantly formulating, testing and developing explanatory theory (Ericsson, 2018; Stigler and Miller, 2018). All these thought processes can be characterised as “intuition” (Hogarth, 2001).

In short, developing teachers’ judgement and intuition is crucial to learning to be more effective.

A balance between knowledge and skills

Underpinning this intuition is an integrated balance of theoretical knowledge and practical skills.

In the GTT, what teachers need to know is grounded in research evidence. Specifically, the model for Great Teaching that we set out in our evidence review (Coe et al., 2020) provides the structure (see editor’s note, below). Great Teachers understand the evidence and formal theory that explain the importance of:

• Understanding the content they are teaching and how it is learnt;
• Creating a supportive environment for learning;
• Managing the classroom to maximise opportunity to learn;
• Presenting content, activities and interactions that activate their students’ thinking.

But just understanding the formal theory is not enough: teachers have to be able to apply it in practice in their context and connect their own experiences to it. This more personalised, applied theory corresponds to the notion of a “mental model” that features in most versions of “deliberate practice” (Deans for Impact, 2016; Ericsson & Pool, 2016).

Part of the justification for the importance of knowledge is the need for adaptation, outlined above. If teachers just learn a technique or skill, they may have the kind of “routine expertise” (Hatano & Inagaki, 1986) that allows them to perform this technique effectively under standard conditions. But to be able to adapt and apply it in a different situation they need “adaptive expertise”: an understanding of why, when, how and with what it should be used or modified.

The development of techniques is also a specific focus of the GTT. Sometimes people worry that focusing on techniques may be atomistic and oversimplistic, reducing the complex art of teaching into a set of decontextualised skills. Actually, we learn complex skills most effectively by breaking them down, using “decompositions of practice” (Grossman et al., 2009) to identify, isolate and practise specific elements of classroom teaching. The learning from such practising may be accelerated by using “approximations of practice”—simulations or rehearsal opportunities that are simpler and lower-stakes than the real thing, to scaffold the learning (Deans for Impact, 2016).

Both decompositions and approximations are key elements of deliberate practice (Deans for Impact, 2016). Deliberate practice also requires the development of skills to be supported by challenging and specific goals for improvement, as well as feedback to inform learning. Both goals and feedback are a core part of the GTT environment.

Although teaching skills can be developed and practised in this artificial way, those skills then need to be applied, incorporated and embedded in the classroom. Again, the GTT provides for this, scheduling practice in context to ensure skills become integrated, fluent and automatic.

Further support for this balanced view of expertise is found in the review by Sims et al. (2022) of the impact of CPD. They find that programs that instil insight, motivate goals, teach techniques and embed practice have slightly bigger effects than those that do not do all four. (There are, however, caveats to this support, as the small difference may not be clear, given the number and differences of the studies.)

If teacher expertise is the strongest determinant of student achievement , and the main function of professional development is to develop expertise, then how we think about expertise really matters. Expertise does not just grow naturally with experience, but it can be developed—given the right conditions. Expertise requires a balance of knowledge, skills, and judgement. To be effective, professional development needs to address all three.

Designing a CPD package that systematically develops the most powerful knowledge, skills and judgement for all teachers—and then helps them to embed that into everyday practice—is a challenging task. For a school to create something this complex and of high quality is pretty much impossible. Fortunately, the Great Teaching Toolkit does it all, in a way that is flexible and easy to use. Find out more here .

(Editor’s note: Sometimes people think the GTT is the Evidence Review , perhaps because it was the first part we published. But the GTT is a genuine toolkit of resources, including evidence summaries, courses, feedback instruments, structures for collaboration, and more. In other words, a comprehensive CPD package.)

Coe, R., Rauch, C. J., Kime, S., & Singleton, D. (2020). Great teaching toolkit: Evidence Review .

Deans for Impact. (2016). Practice with purpose: The emerging science of teacher expertise .

Ericsson, K. A. (2018). An introduction to the second edition of The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance: Its development, organization, and content. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (pp. 3–20). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316480748.001

Ericsson, K. A., & Pool, R. (2016). Peak: Secrets from the new science of expertise (NV-). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. W. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record , 111 (9), 2055–2100. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810911100905

Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma, & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262–272). W.H. Freeman and Co.

Hogarth, R. M. (2001). Educating intuition . Chicago.

Kahneman, D. (2012). Thinking, fast and slow . Penguin Books London.

Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist , 38 (1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4

Lortie-Forgues, H., & Inglis, M. (2019). Rigorous large-scale educational RCTs are often uninformative: Should we be concerned? Educational Researcher , 48 (3), 158–166. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19832850

Sims, S., Fletcher-Wood, H., O’Mara-Eves, A., Cottingham, S., Stansfield, C., Goodrich, J., Herwegen, J. Van, & Anders, J. (2022). Effective teacher professional development: New theory and a meta-analytic test (507; 22). https://doi.org/10.26300/rzet-bf74

Stigler, J. W., & Miller, K. F. (2018). Expertise and Expert Performance in Teaching. In The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (pp. 431–452). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316480748.024

Thanks so much for this. I’m delivering a session on this element. One would assume it would be directed to ECTs but SLT need to recognise its importance, as do seasoned teachers. Especially important to identify those lethal mutations, adapt and chunk deliberate practice whilst developing adaptations to deliver subject knowledge.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Our Approach to Teacher CPD
• Our Advisory Board
• Our Partners
• Press Releases
• Privacy Policy

How are schools and colleges using the Great Teaching Toolkit? We have 22 case studies for you to choose from 👇 hubs.la/Q01Xr3g_0

Teacher collaboration: Why we’re for it (even when the evidence is weak). Blog by @ProfCoe 👇 hubs.la/Q01Xr1kk0

Encouraging better conversations about teaching and learning. hubs.la/Q01XpFbs0

@LouiseW17696382 pic.twitter.com/jmeA…

I have completed Unit Two of @EvidenceInEdu 's Assessment Lead Programme. In this Unit I have mastered assessment design with the assessment blueprint! pic.twitter.com/PxxI…

Evidence Based Education is the proud recipient of a 2024 King's Award for Enterprise , in the Innovation category. Click here to read more ! Copyright © 2024 Evidence Based Education | View our Privacy Policy .

Privacy Overview

How Can You Engage All Students? Find out Thursday, 9/12 at 11AM PDT | Learn More

• Staff Portal
• Consultant Portal

Toll Free 1-800-495-1550

Local 559-834-2449

• Articles & Books
• Explicit Direct Instruction
• Student Engagement
• Checking for Understanding
• ELD Instruction
• For Principals
• About Our Company
• DataWORKS as an EMO
• About Our Professional Development
• English Learner PD
• Schedule a Webinar

Expert Teachers vs. Experienced Teachers: What’s the Difference

• Ask DataWORKS
• Expert Teachers vs. Experienced Teachers:…

Expert Teachers vs. Experienced Teachers

What's the difference.

In John Hattie’s 2012 book, Visible Learning for Teachers, he makes the statement that Expert Teachers are different from Experienced Teachers – and he backs it up with some research. Let’s take a look at the differences and then point out ways to develop more expertise.

Schools Value

Inspired & passionate teaching.

Hattie and colleagues put these two categories of teachers within the framework of inspired and passionate teaching. In fact, in building this culture of instructional excellence, Hattie says that all adults in the school should recognize: 1) that teachers are different in their impact; 2) that all are working toward having a positive effect on all students; and 3) all are vigilant about expert ways to develop student achievement. He makes the further point that if a school has passionate and inspired teachers then that should be their major promotional value. Thus, he shows that developing more Expert Teachers, not just Experienced Teachers, is fundamental to this school-wide goal.

Expert Teachers

1. “expert teachers can identify the most important ways in which to represent the subject they teach.”.

Hattie found that Expert and Experienced Teachers presented the same amount of content, but the Expert Teachers have a more integrated approach in organizing and using the content knowledge. This deeper understanding allows them to apply more strategies, predict student errors, and adapt to student responses in a more effective way.

2. “Expert teachers are proficient at creating an optimal classroom climate for learning.”

The key value in this type of classroom is trust, according to Hattie. This means that it’s okay for students to make errors because that’s the essence of learning. Students have to try out new concepts and adapt their thinking. They can’t be fearful of being belittled by their peers. Essentially, this kind of classroom emphasizes that learning is cool and everyone is involved in the process.

3. “Expert teachers monitor learning and provide feedback.”

These teachers are more able to “think on their feet.” By consistently monitoring the effect they are having on the students, they can be more flexible and improvisational with their lessons.

4. “Expert teachers believe that all students can reach the success criteria.”

Too often, teachers blame the home environment or other conditions for the students’ inability to learn. But the expert teacher, according to Hattie, believes all students can succeed. These teachers are involved with and respectful of their students. They feel responsible that their students learn, and this passion is apparent to their students.

5. “Expert teachers influence surface and deep student outcomes.”

Hattie says, “The fundamental quality of an expert teacher is the ability to have a positive influence on student outcomes.” Expert teachers expect their students to learn in many ways, to have respect for others, and to develop into active citizens. To do this, these teachers set challenging goals and engage students in reaching for these goals.

So what’s the

Difference.

Hattie found that Expert Teachers offered the students more challenge and had a deeper grasp of the content. The surface-level achievement outcomes were about the same between Expert and Experienced Teachers, but the major difference was in the deeper understanding. He found that 74% of work samples in classrooms of expert teachers showed a deeper understanding, whereas only 29% did in Experienced Teacher classrooms. Students taught by Expert teachers had a better understanding of concepts and were able to think more coherently and abstractly.

Hattie also itemized some things that inspired Expert teachers do NOT do.

• They do not punish with grades
• They do not mix up behavior with academic progress.
• They do not value compliance to assignments.
• They do not have low expectations.
• They do not evaluate their impact by how much content is covered.
• They do not prefer homework success over risk-taking on an assignment.

Hattie’s conclusion is that “the ultimate requirement is for teachers to develop the skill of evaluating the effect that they have on their students.”

How to Develop More

Expertise as a Teacher

Dataworks’ Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI) approach to teaching offers teachers at least four ways to boost their expertise along the lines Hattie mentions.

1. Metacognitive Teaching.

Because EDI designs lessons around the seven components of effective teaching, teachers are able to know “why” they are teaching each part of the lesson. They know to start with an Objective, connect to prior knowledge with APK, bring out the Concept with bulletproof definitions and examples, use the Rule of Two for Skill Development and Guided Practice, explain the relevance of the lesson, and provide a closure before attempting independent practice or homework. This provides the deeper understanding that will influence the student to dig deeper.

2. Engagement.

EDI relies on eight engagement norms to create an interactive classroom experience. This sets consistent expectations for students to use the content and the academic language many times a day. It also gives teachers insight into students’ needs.

3. Checking for Understanding.

EDI uses the TAPPLE method of checking for understanding. This gives the teacher immediate feedback on whether students are learning or not. It helps the teacher monitor the learning in real-time and adjust the lesson as needed to better meet the needs of the students. Usually, higher-order questions are used for CFUs, and this enables the student to engage at a deeper, more abstract level.

4. Effective Feedback.

EDI offers 7 ways to give students feedback for incorrect answers. This ranges from cueing and prompting to de-escalation to explaining your thinking to pair-sharing. This in-class interaction with the content is critical for monitoring the effectiveness of teaching and expecting all students to progress. Another technique is calling on random students. This ensures that every student is considering the answer to the question; students are expected to engage with the academic content.

Developing a culture of instructional excellence in your school relies on developing inspired, passionate teachers who have become experts. EDI is a proven approach to achieving that goal.

To set your expectations for this level of expertise, contact Joel at [email protected] and inquire about Professional Development.

See how our professional development supports English Learners and download our special report.

6 things to know about eld instruction.

Author:  Mike Neer

Mike has served as editor and curriculum researcher for DataWORKS since 2010. Previously, he taught English in middle school, high schools, and colleges in Illinois, Puerto Rico, and California. He has edited national trade magazines and presented seminars nationwide for businesses and non-profit organizations. He believes words are a powerful educational tool for reporting, reflecting, and revealing.

Related posts

• Research Matters — to the Science Teacher

Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Teachers' Integration of Subject Matter, Pedagogy, Students, and Learning Environments

"Those who can, do. Those who understand, teach."   (Shulman, 1986, p. 14)

Introduction

Recently, there has been a renewed recognition of the importance of teachers' science subject matter knowledge, both as a function of research evidence (e.g., Ball & McDiarmid, 1990; Carlsen, 1987; Hashweh, 1987), and as a function of literature from reform initiatives such as the Holmes Group (1986) and the Renaissance Group (1989). Not surprisingly, it has become clear that  both  teachers' pedagogical knowledge and teachers' subject matter knowledge are crucial to good science teaching and student understanding (Buchmann, 1982, 1983; Tobin & Garnett, 1988).

The recent development of the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) and the Benchmarks for Science Literacy (AAAS, 1993) as well as a multitude of state, district, and school level content area standards, have further renewed emphasis on the importance of subject matter. Moreover, these documents contain not only key subject matter concepts for student learning, but they also inform  pedagogical issues  related to science subject matter content.

The Nature of Pedagogical Content Knowledge

In addition to teachers' subject matter (content) knowledge and their general knowledge of instructional methods (pedagogical knowledge),  pedagogical content  knowledge was originally suggested as a third major component of teaching expertise, by Lee Shulman (1986; 1987) and his colleagues and students (e.g. Carlsen, 1987; Grossman, Wilson, & Shulman, 1989; Gudmundsdottir, 1987a, 1987b; Gudmundsdottir & Shulman, 1987; Marks, 1990). This idea represents a new, broader perspective in our understanding of teaching and learning, and a special issue of the  Journal of Teacher Education  (Ashton, 1990) was devoted to this topic.

Pedagogical content knowledge is a type of knowledge that is unique to teachers, and is based on the manner in which teachers relate their pedagogical knowledge (what they know about teaching) to their subject matter knowledge (what they know about what they teach). It is the integration or the synthesis of teachers' pedagogical knowledge and their subject matter knowledge that comprises pedagogical content knowledge. According to Shulman (1986) pedagogical content knowledge

  .  . . embodies the aspects of content most germane to its teachability. Within the category of pedagogical content knowledge I include, for the most regularly taught topics in one's subject area, the most useful forms of representation of those ideas, the most powerful analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations - in a word, the ways of representing and formulating the subject that make it comprehensible to others . . . [It] also includes an understanding of what makes the learning of specific concepts easy or difficult: the conceptions and preconceptions that students of different ages and backgrounds bring with them to the learning   (p. 9).

Pedagogical content knowledge is a form of knowledge that makes science teachers teachers rather than scientists (Gudmundsdottir, 1987a, b). Teachers differ from scientists, not necessarily in the quality or quantity of their subject matter knowledge, but in how that knowledge is organized and used. In other words, an experienced science teacher's knowledge of science is organized from a  teaching  perspective and is used as a basis for helping students to understand specific concepts. A scientist's knowledge, on the other hand, is organized from a  research  perspective and is used as a basis for developing new knowledge in the field. This idea has been documented in Biology by Hauslein, Good, & Cummins (1992), in a comparison of the organization of subject matter knowledge among groups of experienced science teachers, experienced research scientists, novice science teachers, subject area science majors, and preservice science teachers. Hauslein et al. found that science majors and preservice teachers both showed similar, loosely organized subject matter knowledge; and that the subject matter knowledge of the novice and experienced teachers and the research scientists was much deeper and more complex. However, compared to the researchers (who showed a flexible subject matter structure), the teachers showed a more fixed structure, hypothesized to result from curriculum constraints.

Cochran, DeRuiter, & King (1993) revised Shulman's original model to be more consistent with a constructivist perspective on teaching and learning. They described a model of pedagogical content knowledge that results from an integration of  four  major components, two of which are subject matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. The other two other components of teacher knowledge also differentiate teachers from subject matter experts. One component is teachers' knowledge of students' abilities and learning strategies, ages and developmental levels, attitudes, motivations, and prior knowledge of the concepts to be taught. Students' prior knowledge has been especially visible in the last decade due to literally hundreds of studies on student misconceptions in science and mathematics. The other component of teacher knowledge that contributes to pedagogical content knowledge is teachers' understanding of the social, political, cultural and physical environments in which students are asked to learn. The model in Figure 1 shows that these four components of teachers' knowledge all contribute to the integrated understanding that we call pedagogical content knowledge; and the arrows indicate that pedagogical content knowledge continues to grow with teaching experience. The integrated nature of pedagogical content knowledge is also described by Kennedy (1990).

Research Evidence

Hashweh (1985, 1987) conducted an extensive study of three physics teachers' and three biology teachers' knowledge of science and the impact of that knowledge on their teaching. All six teachers were asked about their subject matter knowledge in both biology and physics, and they were asked to evaluate a textbook chapter and to plan an instructional unit on the basis of that material. Given a concept like photosynthesis for example, the biology teachers knew those specific misconceptions that students were likely to bring to the classroom (such as the idea that plants get their food from the soil) or which chemistry concepts the students would need to review before learning photosynthesis. The biology teachers also understood which ideas were likely to be most difficult (e.g. how ATP-ADP transformations occur) and how best to deal with those difficult concepts using a variety of analogies, examples, demonstrations and models. The biology teachers could describe multiple instructional "tools" for these situations; but, although they were experienced teachers, they had only very general ideas about how to teach difficult physics concepts. The physics teachers, on the other hand, could list many methods and ideas for teaching difficult physics concepts, but had few specific ideas for teaching difficult biology concepts.

When the teachers in Hashweh's study were asked about their subject matter knowledge in the field that was not their specific field, they showed more misconceptions, more misunderstandings, and a less organized understanding of the information. Within their own fields, they were more sensitive to subtle themes presented in textbooks, and could and did modify the text material based on their teaching experiences. Moreover, they were more likely to discover and act on student misconceptions. The teachers used about the same number of examples and analogies when planning instruction in both fields, but those analogies and examples were more accurate and more relevant in the teachers' field of expertise.

Other studies have shown that new teachers have incomplete or superficial levels of pedagogical content knowledge (Carpenter, Fennema, Petersen, & Carey, 1988; Feiman-Nemser & Parker, 1990; Gudmundsdottir & Shulman, 1987; Shulman, 1987). A novice teacher tends to rely on unmodified subject matter knowledge (most often directly extracted from the curriculum) and may not have a coherent framework or perspective from which to present the information. The novice also tends to make broad pedagogical decisions without assessing students' prior knowledge, ability levels, or learning strategies (Carpenter, et al., 1988). In addition, preservice teachers have been shown to find it difficult to articulate the relationships between pedagogical ideas and subject matter concepts (Gess-Newsome & Lederman, 1993); and low levels of pedagogical content knowledge have been found to be related to frequent use of factual and simple recall questions (Carlsen, 1987). These studies also indicate that new teachers have major concerns about pedagogical content knowledge, and they struggle with how to transform and represent the concepts and ideas in ways that make sense to the specific students they are teaching (Wilson, Shulman, & Richert, 1987). Grossman (1985, cited in Shulman, 1987) shows that this concern is present even in new teachers who possess the substantial subject matter knowledge gained through a master's degree in a specific subject matter area, and Wilson (1992) documents that more experienced teachers have a better "overarching" view of the content field and on which to base teaching decisions.

These and other studies show that pedagogical content knowledge is highly specific to the concepts being taught, is much more than just subject matter knowledge alone, and develops over time as a result of teaching experience. What is unique about the teaching process is that it requires teachers to "transform" their subject matter knowledge for the purpose of teaching (Shulman, 1986). This transformation occurs as the teacher critically reflects  on and  interprets  the subject matter; finds multiple ways to  represent  the information as analogies, metaphors, examples, problems, demonstrations, and/or classroom activities; adapts the material to students' developmental levels and abilities, gender, prior knowledge, and misconceptions; and finally  tailors the material to those specific individual or groups of students to whom the information will be taught. Gudmundsdottir (1987a, b) describes this transformation process as a continual restructuring of subject matter knowledge for the purpose of teaching; and Buchmann (1984) discusses the importance of science teachers maintaining a fluid control or "flexible understanding" (p. 21) of their subject knowledge, i.e. be able to see a specific set of concepts from a variety of viewpoints and at a variety of levels, depending on the needs and abilities of the students.

Recommendations for Teachers

To become more aware of this knowledge and to be able to more clearly think about it, teachers can find ways to keep track of this information, just as they ask students to do with the data collected in lab assignments. One way is to keep a personal notebook describing their teaching, even just once a week or so for a few difficult concepts. Another strategy is to videotape or audiotape a few class periods just to help see what's happening in the classroom. (It's not necessary to have anyone but the teacher see or listen to the tape.) Then teachers can start to think about the following types of questions. Which ideas need the most explanation? Why are those ideas more difficult for the students? What examples, demonstrations, and analogies seemed to work the best? Why did they work or not work? Which  students  did they work best  for ?

• Teachers can try new ways of exploring how the students are thinking about the concepts being taught. Ask students about how and what they understand (not in the sense of a test, but in the sense of an interview). Ask students what "real life" personal situations they think science relates to. Try to get inside their heads and see the ideas from their point of view.
• Start discussions with other teachers about teaching. Take the time to find someone you can share ideas with and take the time to learn to trust each other. Exchange strategies for teaching difficult concepts or dealing with specific types of students. Get involved in a peer coaching project in your school or district. District faculty development staff or people at a local university can help you get one started and may be able to provide substitute support. Ask about telephone hot-lines and computer networks for teachers, and explore the world wide web.
• Get involved in action research projects. Much of the newestM and most important research is being conducted by teachers. Take a class at your nearest university and find out what is going on. Get involved with a mentor teacher program or a teacher on special assignment program. Join organizations and go to conferences such as the national or regional National Science Teachers Association or the NARST meetings. There are also often summer workshops and institutes in specific fields in science at many universities and colleges.

Where Should We Go From Here?

Contemporary research has focused on how to describe teachers' pedagogical content knowledge and how it influences the teaching process. We have yet, however, to fully understand the four components of this model, and we have yet to clearly understand how they really develop. We also know very little about how to enhance pedagogical content knowledge in preservice and inservice programs. Teacher involvement in research and university preparation programs is crucial for the development of this important idea and its usefulness for the improvement of science teaching.

by Kathryn F. Cochran, University of Northern Colorado

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. Ashton, P. T. (Ed.). (1990). Theme: Pedagogical Content Knowledge [Special issue].  Journal of Teacher Education, 41 (3). Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W. (1990). The subject matter preparation of teachers. In W. R. Houston, M. Haberman, & J. Sikula (Eds.).  Handbook of research on teacher education  (pp. 437-449). New York: Macmillan. Buchmann, M. (1982). The flight away from content in teacher education and teaching.  Journal of Curriculum Studies, 14 , 1. Buchmann, M. (1984). The flight away from content in teacher education and teaching. In J. Raths & L. Katz (Eds.).  Advances in teacher education  (Vol. 1, pp. 29-48). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Carlsen, W. S. (1987). Why do you ask? The effects of science teacher subject-matter knowledge on teacher questioning and classroom discourse. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 293 181). Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Petersen, P., & Carey, D. (1988). Teachers' pedagogical content knowledge of students' problem solving in elementary arithmetic.  Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19 , 385-401. Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., & King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation.  Journal of Teacher Education, 44 , 263-272. Feiman-Nemser, S., & Parker, M. B. (1990). Making subject matter part of the conversation in learning to teach.  Journal of Teacher Education, 41 , 32-43. Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. (1993). Preservice biology teachers' knowledge structures as a function of professional teacher education: A year-long assessment.  Science Education, 77 , 25-45. Grossman, P. L., Wilson, S. M., & Shulman, L. (1989). Teachers of substance: Subject matter knowledge for teaching. In M. C. Reynolds (Ed.).  Knowledge base for the beginning teacher  (pp. 23-36). Oxford: Pergamon Press. Gudmundsdottir, S. (1987a). Learning to teach social studies: Case studies of Chris and Cathy. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Washington, D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 290 700) Gudmundsdottir, S. (1987b). Pedagogical content knowledge: teachers' ways of knowing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Washington, D.C. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 290 701) Gudmundsdottir, S. & Shulman, L. (1987). Pedagogical content knowledge in social studies.  Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 31 , 59-70. Hashweh, M. Z. (1987). Effects of subject matter knowledge in the teaching of biology and physics.  Teaching and Teacher Education, 3 , 109-120. Holmes Group. (1986).  Tomorrow's teachers: A report of the Holmes Group.  East Lansing, MI: The Holmes Group. Kennedy, M. (1990).  Trends and Issues in: Teachers' Subject Matter Knowledge. Trends and Issues Paper No. 1.  ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education, Washington, DC. (ED#322 100) Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception.  Journal of teacher education, 41 , 3-11. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Renaissance Group. (1989).  Teachers for the new world: A statement of principles . Cedar Falls, IA: The Renaissance Group. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.  Educational Researcher, 15,  4-14. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.  Harvard Educational Review, 57 , 1-22. Tobin, K., & Garnett, P. (1988). Exemplary practice in science classrooms.  Science Education, 72,  197-208. Wilson, J. M. (1992, December). Secondary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge about chemical equilibrium. Paper presented at the International Chemical Education Conference, Bangkok, Thailand. Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, A. E. (1987). '150 different ways' of knowing: Representation of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.).  Exploring teachers' thinking  (pp. 104-124). London: Cassell.

John Dabell

Every Day Is A School Day

What Do Expert Teachers Do?

It takes a bold teacher to say they are an ‘expert’ but they do exist and there are some cracking ones out there. Even if they won’t admit it, the expert teacher does certain things that make them stand out.

So what is it they do compared to the rest of us?

Professor John Hattie and his colleague Dick Jaeger (2003) studied the differences between experienced and expert teachers.  and found a range of key points.

They identified five major dimensions of excellent teachers. Expert teachers

• can identify essential representations of their subject
• can guide learning through classroom interactions
• can monitor learning and provide feedback
• can attend to affective attributes
• can influence student outcomes

Let’s take a closer look at these.

1. Expert teachers have deeper representations about teaching and learning.

Hattie and Jaeger say that experts and experienced teachers might share the same amount of knowledge about curriculum matters or knowledge about teaching strategies but experts differ in how they organise and use this content knowledge.

Experts possess knowledge that is more integrated, in that they combine new subject matter content knowledge with prior knowledge; can relate current lesson content to other subjects in the curriculum; and make lessons uniquely their own by changing, combining, and adding to them according to their students’ needs and their own goals.

Expert teachers adopt a problem-solving mindset and are more flexible and opportunistic. They look for further information and are guided on solving problems in relation to individual students’ performance in the class.

They take advantage of new information, quickly bringing new interpretations and representations of the problem to light (Shulman, 1987).

Expert teachers aren’t guided by bullet-points but improvise and adapt and spend more time trying to understand the problem to be solved rather than trying out different solutions. They are greater seekers and users of feedback information.

Expert teachers are better decision-makers and can identify what decisions are important and which are less important decisions. Commonly, if expert teachers don’t have a written lesson plan, they have a great mental lesson plan they can easily describe.

2. Guiding Learning through Classroom Interactions

Expert teachers are proficient at creating an optimal classroom climate for learning. They craft a truly ‘learning’ environment by allowing for, and tolerating, student errors. Mistakes are welcomed, student questioning is high, engagement is the norm, and their classrooms are the places where students can gain reputations as effective learners.

Expert teachers have a multi-dimensionally complex perception of classroom situations.

They are good at scanning classroom behaviour and make greater references to the language of instruction and learning of students.

Expert teachers are more context-dependent and have high situation cognition. They are more likely to ask questions and want to know about the ability, experience, and background of the students they are to teach. They also want to know about the facility in which they would be teaching.

3. Monitoring Learning and Provide Feedback

Expert teachers are more adept at monitoring student problems and assessing their level of understanding and progress, and they provide much more relevant, useful feedback.

They anticipate and prevent disturbances from occurring because they are more in tune and responsive to students. They can detect when students lose interest and are not understanding.

They provide better feedback because they are better able to filter relevant from irrelevant information, and are able to monitor, understand, and interpret events in more detail and with more insight than experienced teachers.

Expert teachers are more adept at developing and testing hypotheses about learning difficulties or instructional strategies.

They are also more ‘automatic’. They develop automaticity so as to free working memory to deal with other more complex characteristics of a situation.

4. Attending to Affective Attributes

Expert teachers have high respect for students as learners and people, and demonstrate care and commitment for them. Being in tune and enjoying good relationships with their students means they can more readily recognise barriers to learning and can seek ways to overcome these barriers.

Expert teachers are passionate about teaching and learning and they show more emotionality about successes and failures in their work.

5. Influencing Student Outcomes

Expert teachers engage students in learning and develop in their students self-regulation, involvement in mastery learning, enhanced self-efficacy, and self-esteem as learners.

They aim to motivate their students to master rather than perform, they enhance students’ self-concept and self-efficacy about learning, and they set appropriate challenging tasks, and they aim for both surface and deep outcomes.

Expert teachers provide appropriate challenging tasks and goals for students that are beyond the “do your best” goals. 80% of most class time is spent with teachers talking and students listening.

Expert teachers have positive influences on students’ achievement. They enhance surface and deep learning.

Click To Tweet

Share this:

By johndabell, related post, the 1,000 hour chat for teachers, touchline experts, do your staff have guild knowledge, leave a reply cancel reply, discover more from john dabell.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Eberly Center

Teaching excellence & educational innovation, teaching principles.

Teaching is a complex, multifaceted activity, often requiring us as instructors to juggle multiple tasks and goals simultaneously and flexibly. The following small but powerful set of principles can make teaching both more effective and more efficient, by helping us create the conditions that support student learning and minimize the need for revising materials, content, and policies. While implementing these principles requires a commitment in time and effort, it often saves time and energy later on.

Effective teaching involves acquiring relevant knowledge about students and using that knowledge to inform our course design and classroom teaching.

Effective teaching involves aligning the three major components of instruction: learning objectives, assessments, and instructional activities..

Taking the time to do this upfront saves time in the end and leads to a better course. Teaching is more effective and student learning is enhanced when (a) we, as instructors, articulate a clear set of learning objectives (i.e., the knowledge and skills that we expect students to demonstrate by the end of a course); (b) the instructional activities (e.g., case studies, labs, discussions, readings) support these learning objectives by providing goal-oriented practice; and (c) the assessments (e.g., tests, papers, problem sets, performances) provide opportunities for students to demonstrate and practice the knowledge and skills articulated in the objectives, and for instructors to offer targeted feedback that can guide further learning.

Effective teaching involves articulating explicit expectations regarding learning objectives and policies.

There is amazing variation in what is expected of students across American classrooms and even within a given discipline. For example, what constitutes evidence may differ greatly across courses; what is permissible collaboration in one course could be considered cheating in another. As a result, students’ expectations may not match ours. Thus, being clear about our expectations and communicating them explicitly helps students learn more and perform better. Articulating our learning objectives (i.e., the knowledge and skills that we expect students to demonstrate by the end of a course) gives students a clear target to aim for and enables them to monitor their progress along the way. Similarly, being explicit about course policies (e.g., on class participation, laptop use, and late assignment) in the syllabus and in class allows us to resolve differences early and tends to reduce conflicts and tensions that may arise. Altogether, being explicit leads to a more productive learning environment for all students. More information on how clear learning objectives supports students' learning. (pdf)

Effective teaching involves prioritizing the knowledge and skills we choose to focus on.

Coverage is the enemy: Don’t try to do too much in a single course. Too many topics work against student learning, so it is necessary for us to make decisions – sometimes difficult ones – about what we will and will not include in a course. This involves (a) recognizing the parameters of the course (e.g., class size, students’ backgrounds and experiences, course position in the curriculum sequence, number of course units), (b) setting our priorities for student learning, and (c) determining a set of objectives that can be reasonably accomplished.

Effective teaching involves recognizing and overcoming our expert blind spots.

We are not our students! As experts, we tend to access and apply knowledge automatically and unconsciously (e.g., make connections, draw on relevant bodies of knowledge, and choose appropriate strategies) and so we often skip or combine critical steps when we teach. Students, on the other hand, don’t yet have sufficient background and experience to make these leaps and can become confused, draw incorrect conclusions, or fail to develop important skills. They need instructors to break tasks into component steps, explain connections explicitly, and model processes in detail. Though it is difficult for experts to do this, we need to identify and explicitly communicate to students the knowledge and skills we take for granted, so that students can see expert thinking in action and practice applying it themselves.

Effective teaching involves adopting appropriate teaching roles to support our learning goals.

Even though students are ultimately responsible for their own learning, the roles we assume as instructors are critical in guiding students’ thinking and behavior. We can take on a variety of roles in our teaching (e.g., synthesizer, moderator, challenger, commentator). These roles should be chosen in service of the learning objectives and in support of the instructional activities.  For example, if the objective is for students to be able to analyze arguments from a case or written text, the most productive instructor role might be to frame, guide and moderate a discussion.  If the objective is to help students learn to defend their positions or creative choices as they present their work, our role might be to challenge them to explain their decisions and consider alternative perspectives. Such roles may be constant or variable across the semester depending on the learning objectives.

Effective teaching involves progressively refining our courses based on reflection and feedback.

Teaching requires adapting. We need to continually reflect on our teaching and be ready to make changes when appropriate (e.g., something is not working, we want to try something new, the student population has changed, or there are emerging issues in our fields).  Knowing what and how to change requires us to examine relevant information on our own teaching effectiveness.  Much of this information already exists (e.g., student work, previous semesters’ course evaluations, dynamics of class participation), or we may need to seek additional feedback with help from the university teaching center (e.g., interpreting early course evaluations, conducting focus groups, designing pre- and posttests). Based on such data, we might modify the learning objectives, content, structure, or format of a course, or otherwise adjust our teaching. Small, purposeful changes driven by feedback and our priorities are most likely to be manageable and effective.

• Our Mission

How Novice and Expert Teachers Approach Classroom Management Differently

A 2021 study reveals the ways in which new and experienced teachers think about discipline—plus 6 takeaways for managing your classroom effectively this year.

Good classroom management is mostly invisible. While outbursts and disruptions are inevitable in the course of an academic year, they can be kept to a minimum by employing subtle techniques that work behind the scenes to create a positive classroom culture. 

Understandably, there’s a significant gap between how novice and expert teachers approach classroom management—one that can take years of experience and training to fill, according to a new study . And while there’s no replacement for spending time in the classroom, an awareness of the right strategies, and the right mindsets, can put new teachers on the fast track to adopting tactics that work but might feel counterintuitive or risky. Meanwhile, more experienced teachers can benefit from insights that may help them sharpen or extend their existing playbook.

In the study, researchers asked 39 novice and expert teachers—school leaders and mentors in charge of training new teachers—to watch video clips of a high school classroom. In each video, an educator could be observed giving instructions or walking through the class while students worked. During each video, a disruptive event would occur, ranging from students talking loudly to students refusing to participate in the lesson. The teachers in the study provided feedback on the events in the classroom, critiqued the observed teacher’s own classroom management strategies, and offered their own solutions.

Here’s how expert teachers approached classroom management—plus six teacher-tested strategies to make changes in your own classroom this year.

SEEING THE BIG PICTURE

While both novice and expert teachers relied on reactive strategies to address student misbehavior—for example, by giving a reprimand like “Eyes on me!” if students were being disruptive—expert teachers were far more likely to consider how proactive strategies could have prevented the misbehavior in the first place. 

New teachers tended to view classroom management narrowly, as a way to respond directly to disciplinary problems, while expert teachers had a “more comprehensive understanding of classroom management and its complexity,” the researchers found—conceiving of discipline in the broader context of how lessons were organized and executed, how clearly the teacher communicated expectations, and even how the physical environment was arranged. 

SEEKING ROOT CAUSES

Expert teachers were more adept at interpreting the causes and influences behind student behavior. If students weren’t paying attention, for example, inexperienced teachers were more likely to focus solely on correcting behavior, while expert teachers entertained the idea that the behaviors were situational and sought strategies to improve the learning environment to short-circuit future disruptions. 

Compared with novice teachers, experienced teachers tended to have a “more elaborate and interconnected” understanding of student misbehavior, forming a holistic picture of their students. 

STRIKING THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN AUTHORITY AND AUTONOMY

Establishing a set of rules and then demanding compliance doesn’t work, especially with older students. Eventually, expert teachers come to see the classroom as an ecosystem involving a delicate balance between teacher authority and student autonomy. “They viewed student behavior in the context of teacher behavior, thinking about reasons and solutions” instead of overemphasizing “order and discipline.” 

Sometimes when students act out they are merely exhibiting normal, healthy developmental behaviors. For the most experienced teachers, a healthy classroom is one in which students are allowed some reasonable leeway in their behaviors and are taught how to think of others and regulate themselves.

FINDING YOUR PLACE AND TONE

All teachers made efforts to monitor the room, but expert teachers were more proficient, often because they also had greater positional awareness, making sure that they occupied locations where students—and student work—would be in view. For example, one teacher noted that he frequently “walks through the rows and looks at what they (students) are doing”—a common strategy to ensure that students are on task when doing independent work. 

Expert teachers were also mindful of how their body language, facial expressions, presence, and ability to control their own emotions affected the emotional state of their students. 

“Emotions are contagious, and when a teacher is able to model a calm presence through their tone, facial expression, and posture, students are less likely to react defensively,” writes Lori Desautels, a professor of education at Butler University. Work to project enthusiasm, and try to keep cool if at all possible. 

GETTING ADAPTIVE 

“Successful classroom management requires the adaptive application of a repertoire of different strategies,” the researchers explain. If a student is acting out because they’re having a bad day, that’s going to require a different approach than if they’re frustrated by the difficulty of a lesson or are confused by the instructions—researchers discovered that the latter issues account for 20 percent of classroom misbehavior, according to a separate 2018 study . 

As teachers become more experienced, they undergo a “shift in perspective” from “seeing parts versus seeing the whole,” the researchers report. While novice teachers relied more on routines and consequences, essentially following a script when it came to managing students’ behavior, expert teachers had “adaptive expertise” that allowed them to draw from a variety of strategies depending on the context. 

TIPS FOR TEACHERS

1. Plan your environment. Your classroom plays a key role in shaping the behavior of your students. A 2018 study , for example, found that heavily decorated classrooms made it harder for students to focus on a lesson, leading to off-task or disruptive behavior. While certain visual elements of the classroom can support learning—anchor charts, maps, images of role models, and displays of student work, for example—an overabundance of decorations can overstimulate. 

Seating plans also matter: A 2012 study found that students were three times more likely to be disruptive if they chose their own seat rather than being assigned one. If you’re going to offer seating choice—many teachers say it ultimately improves classroom behavior—consider doing so only situationally, and provide clear rules to let students know the consequences of frequent misbehavior.

2. Co-create norms. A common classroom management mistake is to display a list of rules and expect compliance. It can be more productive to have a conversation with your students about the reasons why rules exist, and then produce a set of governing principles by consensus. In California, high school English teacher David Tow instills a sense of shared responsibility and ownership over the classroom’s civility by co-creating classroom norms with his students. Together, they identify guidelines like being respectful of others, and then they evaluate the guidelines’ feasibility throughout the year, discarding the ones that don’t seem valuable, meaningful, or useful.

3. It’s not one size fits all. Find ways to measure the size of the problem, and respond accordingly. When a student misbehaves, Grace Dearborn, a high school teacher and the author of Conscious Classroom Management , has developed a series of tiered choices framed “as consequences, not punishments” to give students more autonomy. For example, low-level misbehavior might receive a “gentle” response, such as using nonverbal hand signals to encourage students to pay attention, or Dearborn might try “drive-by discipline,” like saying the child’s name quickly to disrupt the behavior without getting drawn into a bigger battle. 

Consequences are clear to the students and increase in intensity if the misbehavior persists: Students may be asked to change seats or take a time-out to reflect on their actions. Ultimately, the most severe consequences—detention or a meeting with parents—are used if the student’s behavior doesn’t change. 

4. Consider what’s unspoken. Nonverbal communication like eye contact, body language, and even how you position yourself in the room has an impact on student behavior.

“Presence is crucial to maintaining classroom management and to effective delivery of instruction, and it’s a skill we can develop with effort,” explains Sol Henik, a high school teacher. Develop your teaching presence—you can record yourself while you’re teaching or solicit advice from trusted colleagues—circulate in areas where you can see and be seen, and make productive use of eye contact, not as a tool for surveillance but as a way to connect with your students, project confidence and accessibility, and build rapport. 

5. Relationships, relationships, relationships. Ultimately, classroom management begins and ends with strong relationships. A 2018 study found that greeting students at the door set a positive tone for the rest of the day—for example, dramatically improving academic engagement and behavior. Another study concluded that engaging in prosocial activities throughout the school year—such as regular check-ins or morning meetings—can reduce disruptions by up to 75 percent.

Finally, learning a little about students’ personal lives through get-to-know-you surveys and identity activities can provide insights into the root causes of behavior. Students can draw their own “identity portraits” to share both visible and invisible details about themselves, like religion, ethnicity, or the hobbies they enjoy. You can also use writing prompts like “What inspires you?” or “What dreams do you have for after high school?” to mine information you can use to deepen relationships and connect classroom lessons to students’ interests. 

6. Pick your battles (but do battle when you have to). Students who are frequently the target of negative attention—being called out if they’re not paying attention or are chatting with another student, for example—are more likely to become disengaged and apathetic, which leads to more behavioral issues in the future, according to a 2016 study . Don’t try to fix all misbehavior in your classroom—pick your battles, avoid escalating the situation if you can, and remember that the most effective classroom management strategies are based on building relationships and increasing engagement with the content.

• News & Blog
• Kaleidoscope
• Apply for a Fellowship
• Annual Reports
• Awards & Recognition
• Find Knowles Fellows
• Teaching Fellows Program
• Senior Fellows Program
• Fellows Stories
• Fellowship FAQ
• In-Person Courses
• Online Courses
• Short Courses
• Upcoming Courses
• Instructor Biographies
• Our Journal (Kaleidoscope)
• Partnerships
• Get Involved

Deepening Content Knowledge for Teaching

Jen Mossgrove writes about deepening content knowledge for teaching.

Every day teachers make many decisions that influence the opportunities students have to learn and engage with content. Imagine these scenarios:

• During class, your students are working in groups of four to solve a proportional reasoning task. While you anticipated many of the solution paths the groups would follow, including thinking additively rather than multiplicatively, you realize that one group is using a method that you had never seen before.  Their thinking seems reasonable for this particular problem, but you aren’t sure if their method only works in this case, or if would be more generalizable. How do you make sense of the students’ thinking?
• You’ve been assigned to a district level committee on science teaching by your department chair at your high school. The committee also has representatives from the elementary schools and middle schools. The assistant superintendent of curriculum has stated the purpose of the committee is to align the district’s curriculum to the new state standards and testing. How do you draw on your understanding of teaching chemistry to help you in considering the curriculum and standards across K-12?
• Your department is adopting new textbooks and the chair has asked that each member of the department review the options that have been selected at the district level. You have noticed over the last few years that many students struggle with linear and quadratic functions, so you decided to examine each potential text for how it presents this topic. You assumed the books would be similar, but actually, the books varied a lot, including in the order of the chapters. How do you evaluate the texts to determine which will best support student learning of linear and quadratic functions?
• You bumped into a colleague in the hallway and she shared that earlier in class, the students were getting emotional during group work when they were discussing the notion of the scientific method. One student was arguing that the method had to be followed exactly, or it wouldn’t really be science; another said his dad worked in a lab and never used the scientific method linearly. She asked me: “What messages do you think we’re sending as a department about science?”

While these four scenarios might seem different, one theme that unites them is that they each require the teacher to draw on a knowledge and understanding of the content that is unique to the work of teachers and teaching.  Teaching requires making a multitude of decisions—both in the moment and over time—that require an understanding of the discipline and content, beyond just getting the “right” answer. It’s true that a strong foundation of knowledge in the discipline is a necessary component of teaching, but that is just a first step for developing the type of content knowledge that is needed for the work of teaching.

KSTF’s view of Content Knowledge needed for Teaching (CKT) is influenced by educators such as Deborah Ball, Heather Hill and Lee Shulman. Specifically, we draw on the mathematical knowledge needed for teaching framework of Ball and her colleagues (Ball, Thames & Phelps, 2008). While the framework is specific to mathematics, we see parallels to the sciences. Drawing on Hill et al’s (2009) definition, we see CKT as the “[content specific] knowledge teachers use in the classroom to produce instruction and student growth (p.374).”  That is, CKT extends well beyond content knowledge alone to include the content work in which teachers engage. Teachers leverage their CKT to make content informed instructional decisions in their classroom on a regular basis. For example, on any given day, a teacher may need to:

• analyze correct and incorrect solutions and make sense of the reasoning behind the solutions, both in the moment and while reviewing student work;
• make content specific connections between solutions;
• ask a particular question during a discussion to push the content of the lesson;
• organize discussions to facilitate progress along a content trajectory; and
• use representations to convey content specific meaning.

We see this playing out in the first scenario described above. The teacher has to draw on his own understanding of the content to both anticipate student solutions and then make sense of the solution he hadn’t anticipated. In that moment at the student’s desk, he needed to consider why their method might work or anticipate where it might fail, and find a way to help students see that, too. However, CKT extends beyond the walls of the classroom. We see developing a strong content knowledge for teaching as the foundational first step to becoming an exceptional  leading teacher .

In the second scenario, the science teacher will need to consider how scientific ideas develop across the K–12 curriculum. As she works with others to unpack and make sense of the standards and assessments, she will draw on her specialized understanding of the content she has developed about and through teaching. This is similar to the work in which the math teacher in the third scenario will engage, as she must be able to consider the perspectives on teaching, learning and mathematics each text presents, and the possible implications for student learning those might have, as well as try to unpack what impact the different sequence of topics across the books would have. For example, what does it mean for student learning if a text first presents the definition of slope and then provides tasks to use that mathematical idea throughout the rest of the unit, versus if the unit begins with tasks that engage students in developing the idea of slope, but it’s not until later in the text that the term “slope” is officially introduced? The teacher will engage with others at the district around these questions and will need to communicate her ideas to her colleagues back at her school.

The final scenario, considering the message about science that students are receiving, is a critical component of CKT. What are the big ideas of the discipline? What does it really mean to be mathematically or scientifically literate? How do we communicate about those ideas with other teachers, and then how do we explicitly and implicitly communicate those ideas to students? What opportunities do we provide in our classrooms to engage students in learning the essence of mathematics and science?

The  KSTF Teaching Fellowship  is grounded in the understanding that the fundamental work of teachers is helping students learn content. We recognize that while teachers enact pedagogical strategies to help students learn, those strategies need to be grounded in and driven by a teacher’s understanding of her content. For that reason, we see a strong foundation in CKT as fundamental to developing outstanding leading teachers. During the first phase of the Fellowship, we work together to inquire into the many specific ways teachers need to understand content knowledge. Recognizing that there is no one best approach for all topics or contexts, we explore student-focused instruction within larger conceptual frameworks and build our capacity to critically evaluate our options and make choices appropriate for our own teaching contexts. While we start with the understanding that our Fellows have strong content backgrounds, we know that CKT is something that teachers continue to develop and deepen.

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Expert Teaching

DOI link for Expert Teaching

Get Citation

This book is aimed at teachers who wish to improve their professional practice and will help them to think about current practice, not only in terms of skills and competences to be developed, but also areas of knowledge to be enriched. The model of knowledge bases presented is a valuable framework for reflecting on practice and for analyzing professional development needs. The book is therefore an ideal text for teachers taking courses that may lead towards an advanced qualification in teaching or who are undertaking in-service training and action research programs. Teachers approaching 'threshold assessment' will find the book useful in reflecting on the quality of their teaching.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1 | 20  pages, what is expert teaching, chapter 2 | 16  pages, subject knowledge: substantive and syntactic knowledge and beliefs about subject knowledge, chapter 3 | 18  pages, curriculum knowledge and knowledge of educational ends, chapter 4 | 20  pages, models of teaching and learning and general pedagogical knowledge, chapter 5 | 18  pages, knowledge of learners: empirical and cognitive, chapter 6 | 16  pages, knowledge of educational contexts, chapter 7 | 16  pages, knowledge of self, chapter 8 | 18  pages, pedagogical content knowledge, chapter 9 | 16  pages, suggestions for development of practice, chapter 10 | 6  pages, implications.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Taylor & Francis Online
• Taylor & Francis Group
• Students/Researchers
• Librarians/Institutions

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited

Advertisement

Novice Teachers’ Teaching Practices From The Perspectives of Expert Teachers in The Chinese Vocational Education Context

• Regular Article
• Published: 03 November 2022
• Volume 32 , pages 719–728, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Xinglin Jin 1 &
• Weiping Shi 1   nAff2  

496 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Novice teachers’ teaching practices have been studied widely, however, perspectives of expert teachers are missing from these studies. This study explores expert teachers’ opinions on novice teachers’ teaching practice by analysing three main components (problem, solution, and reasoning) of expert teachers’ feedback. The thematic analysis was used to analyse 29 feedback sessions between novice and expert teachers. After a bottom-up categorization, we generated 4 problem themes, 7 solution themes, and 4 reasoning themes. The most commonly mentioned problem, solution, and reasoning themes were, respectively, “teaching performance”, “include more variety of activities and materials”, and “students’ characteristics”. The connections between problem, solution and reasoning show that problem themes “teaching performance” and “materials and assignments”, solution theme “improve teachers’ knowledge or ability”, and reasoning theme “students’ characteristics” are most commonly connected to other feedback components. It indicates the importance of these themes in improving teachers’ teaching practices. Finally, suggestions were provided for policymakers, school leaders, and the TPD programmes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The interplay between teachers’ approaches to teaching, students’ approaches to learning and learning outcomes: a qualitative multi-case study

Professional Learning and Development in Classroom Management for Novice Teachers: A Systematic Review

Novice Teachers Entering the Profession: Problems and Needs Analysis

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Article   Google Scholar  

Broad, J. H. (2016). Vocational knowledge in motion: Rethinking vocational knowledge through vocational teachers’ professional development. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 68 (2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2015.1128962

Chien, C. W. (2017). Elementary school English teachers’ professional learning from teaching demonstrations as professional development. Cogent Education, 4 (1), 1294229.

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development.  Learning Policy Institute . Retrieved January 20, 2022, from https://bibliotecadigital.mineduc.cl/bitstream/handle/20.500.12365/17357/46%20Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf?sequence=1

Deng, L., Zhu, G., Li, G., Xu, Z., Rutter, A., & Rivera, H. (2018). Student teachers’ emotions, dilemmas, and professional identity formation amid the teaching practicums. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 27 , 441–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-018-0404-3

Fantilli, R. D., & McDougall, D. E. (2009). A study of novice teachers: Challenges and supports in the first years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 (6), 814–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.021

Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6 (2), 207–226.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/2F003465430298487

Jin, X., Li, T., Meirink, J., van der Want, A., & Admiraal, W. (2021). Learning from novice–expert interaction in teachers’ continuing professional development. Professional Development in Education , 47 (5), 745–762. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1651752

Jin, X., Tigelaar, D., van der Want, A., & Admiraal, W. (2022). Novice teachers’ appraisal of expert feedback in a teacher professional development programme in Chinese vocational education. Teaching and Teacher Education , 112 , 103652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103652

Kini, T., & Podolsky, A. (2016). Does teaching experience increase teacher effectiveness? A review of the research. Learning Policy Institute . Retrieved January 29, 2022, from https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/our-work/publications-resources/does-teaching-experience-increase-teacher-effectiveness-review-research

Ma, L., Zhao, J., Han, N., & Zhao, J. (2018a). 中职课堂教学现状调查问卷分析—以保定市为例 The analysis of classroom teaching in secondary vocational schools—A case in Baoding. 新课程研究 New Curriculum Research, 5 , 131–136.

Google Scholar  

Ma, N., Xin, S., & Du, J. Y. (2018b). A peer coaching-based professional development approach to improving the learning participation and learning design skills of in-service teachers. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21 (2), 291–304.

Ren, Y. (2018). 中职学校活力课堂的构建策略研究—基于课堂教学管理的视角 Research on the construction strategies of dynamic classroom in secondary vocational schools—From the perspective of classroom teaching management. 职业教育研究 Vocational Education Research, 5 , 41–45.

Seidel, T., Schnitzler, K., Kosel, C., Stürmer, K., & Holzberger, D. (2021). Student characteristics in the eyes of teachers: Differences between novice and expert teachers in judgment accuracy, observed behavioral cues, and gaze. Educational Psychology Review, 33 (1), 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09532-2

Soslau, E. (2015). Development of a post-lesson observation conferencing protocol: Situated in theory, research, and practice. Teaching and Teacher EDucation, 49 , 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2015.02.012

Sun, C. (2013). 职教师资培养:一个亟待关注的问题 Training of vocational teachers: A problem that needs urgent concern. 职教论坛 Journal of Vocational Education, 25 , 63–70.

The Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China (2013). 中小学教师资格考试暂行办法 [ Interim measures for teacher qualification examination in primary and secondary schools ] . Retrieved January 29, 2022, from http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2013/content_2547145.htm

van Ginkel, G., Oolbekkink, H., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2016). Adapting mentoring to individual differences in novice teacher learning: The mentor’s viewpoint. Teachers and Teaching, 22 (2), 198–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1055438

van Griethuijsen, R. A., Kunst, E. M., van Woerkom, M., Wesselink, R., & Poell, R. F. (2020). Does implementation of competence-based education mediate the impact of team learning on student satisfaction? Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 72 (4), 516–535. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2019.1644364

Westerman, D. A. (1991). Expert and novice teacher decision making. Journal of Teacher Education, 42 (4), 292–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248719104200407

Wong, J. L. (2015). How do teachers learn through engaging in school-based teacher learning activities? Applying a knowledge conversion perspective. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24 (1), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-013-0157-y

Download references

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Weiping Shi

Present address: , North Zhongshan Road 3663, Shanghai, 200062, People’s Republic of China

Authors and Affiliations

Institute of Vocational and Adult Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

Xinglin Jin & Weiping Shi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. XJ was responsible for the data collection, first round of date analysis, and the writing of the first draft. WS contributed to the revision, coding checking, and the final approval of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weiping Shi .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Jin, X., Shi, W. Novice Teachers’ Teaching Practices From The Perspectives of Expert Teachers in The Chinese Vocational Education Context. Asia-Pacific Edu Res 32 , 719–728 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00689-8

Download citation

Accepted : 05 October 2022

Published : 03 November 2022

Issue Date : October 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00689-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Expert teacher
• Teacher professional development
• Vocational education and training
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI)

The Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) provides and promotes international comparative research, innovation and key indicators, explores forward-looking and innovative approaches to education and learning, and facilitates bridges between educational research, innovation and policy development.

Select a language

About the centre for educational research and innovation (ceri).

The OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI) is part of the OECD Directorate for Education and Skills.

CERI supports its member countries in their efforts to achieve high quality lifelong learning for all, which contributes to personal development, sustainable economic growth and social cohesion.

CERI’s objectives are to:

• provide and promote international comparative research, innovation and key indicators
• explore forward-looking and innovative approaches to education and learning
• facilitate bridges between educational research, innovation and policy development.

Our mission

CERI draws together international research and expertise, identifies effective practices across different countries and develops new approaches across a range of topics towards the frontiers of education policies, practices and outcomes. CERI’s policy research and research and development (R&D) work includes:

• Mapping what futures could look like and analysing their implications for education.
• Acting as an incubator and providing a “test-bed” for new tools and techniques to support better education policies and practices.
• Developing conceptual or analytical frameworks for emerging challenges.
• Fostering, supporting and evaluating innovation in education policies and practices.
• Measuring and monitoring the state of education at the system level.

How it works

CERI Member Countries and partners :

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czechia, Denmark , Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Türkiye, United Kingdom, United States.

Business at OECD, TUAC and the European Commission contribute to the work.

CERI’s work is overseen by the CERI Governing Board, which is made up of experts nominated by each CERI Member.

• 21st Century Children Understanding the nature of 21st Century childhood is crucial for an education that is increasingly expected to support students to thrive in both a digital and non-digital world, delivering academic learning while also building physical and emotional well-being. This has implications for the skills, capacity and resources required. Learn more
• Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Skills Artificial Intelligence (AI) and robotics are becoming increasingly sophisticated at replicating human skills. The evolution of these technologies could fundamentally transform work over coming decades and deeply affect education’s current role in providing skills and preparing learners for future work. Learn more
• New Professionalism and the Future of Teaching The OECD’s expanding evidence base has highlighted the importance of high-quality teachers and teaching in education. Yet, challenging questions remain, and there is a need for space in the teacher debate to anticipate future developments, to strengthen professional identity and to support proactive teacher policy making. Learn more
• Rethinking Assessment of Social and Emotional Skills Large-scale assessments of social and emotional skills mainly use students’ self-assessments, which have some flaws in terms of comparability and, to some extend, validity and interpretability. Smaller studies are trialling more direct assessments of these skills. Work is needed to translate the innovations made in these trials and test them on larger, international scales. » A better understanding of social and emotional skills will lead to better inclusion of these skills in education. Learn more
• Smart Data and Digital Technology in Education: Artificial Intelligence, Learning Analytics and Beyond Data and digital technologies are among the most powerful drivers of innovation in education, offering a broad range of opportunities for system and school management, as well as for teaching and learning. But they also create new policy issues as countries face challenges to reap the benefits of digitalisation in education while minimising its risks. Learn more
• Strengthening the Impact of Education Research Across the OECD, enormous investment and effort has aimed to reinforce the quality, production and use of education research in policy and practice. Despite this, strengthening the impact of research in education policy making and practice remains a challenge for many systems. Learn more
• Teaching, Learning and Assessing Creative and Critical Thinking Skills Creativity and critical thinking prepare students for innovative economies and improve wellbeing. However, educators often lack guidance on how to equip students with creativity and critical thinking within subject teaching. Education systems have likewise rarely established ways to systematically assess students’ acquisition of creativity and critical thinking. Learn more
• Trends Shaping Education Preparing for the future means taking a careful look at how the world is changing. Reflecting on alternative futures helps anticipate and strategically plan for potential shocks and surprises. Learn more

Related programmes

• INES The OECD Indicators of Education Systems (INES) programme seeks to gauge the performance of national education systems through internationally comparable data. Learn more
• Survey on Social and Emotional Skills (SSES) The OECD Survey on Social and Emotional Skills is an international survey that identifies and assesses the conditions and practices that foster or hinder the development of social and emotional skills for 10- and 15-year-old students. Learn more

CERI outputs

Ceri reports.

CERI Working papers

• Bridging the research-practice gap in education 5 July 2024
• Innovative tools for the direct assessment of social and emotional skills 3 June 2024
• Managing choice, coherence, and specialisation in upper secondary education 29 February 2024
• Fostering higher-order thinking skills online in higher education 5 February 2024
• The right conditions: Systemic enablers for a culture of research engagement in education 26 January 2024
• Social and emotional skills 15 November 2023
• How are OECD governments navigating the digital higher education landscape? 9 November 2023
• Child participation in decision making 2 November 2023
• Indicators of inclusion in education 26 October 2023
• Digital equity and inclusion in education 8 August 2023
• Putting AI to the test 15 July 2023
• What systematic connections should we have around schools to support the work of teachers? 1 June 2023
• The assessment of students’ creative and critical thinking skills in higher education across OECD countries 26 May 2023
• Catching up on lost learning opportunities 11 May 2023
• Schools as hubs for social and emotional learning 16 March 2023

Latest blog posts

• Why social and emotional learning needs to be prioritised in schools
• Even the Beatles needed an Intermediary
• Creativity, critical thinking & climate education for the green transition
• How can we break down barriers to using education research?

Contact CERI

For more information: CERI.contact@oecd.org

Your Journey Starts Here

Take the next step toward your future.

Optionally, tell us more

Flexible courses and programs designed to transform your life.

Certificates and Credentials

University pathways, corporate, custom & apprenticeships, international experience, what's your dream, your ucr experience.

Unmatched Quality

UC is a global leader in quality, top-notch education.

Experienced Instructors

Bringing real-world expertise into the classroom.

Interactive Learning

Network and collaborate with diverse classmates.

It's All About You

You are our priority, and we are here to support you.

2024 Graduation

Partnering with BCOE

The Rise of UC Riverside

News & Spotlights

Social Justice Taskforce Takes Top UPCEA Award

UPCEA has awarded University Extension its highest honor for exceptional work on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives that demonstrate positive impact and cultural shift, spearheaded by our Social Justice Taskforce.

Innovative Partnership: UC Degree Completion

Excited to announce our part in this $4.85 million state-funded initiative to help students reset and re-engage in their academic goals to complete their degree. Our goal is to offer solutions so that nothing stands in their way.

OF OUR STUDENTS LIVE OR WORK IN THE INLAND EMPIRE

OF OUR STUDENTS ARE EMPLOYED FULL-TIME

Locales in the Area

Fedoseyevka.

• Categories: city or town , big city and locality
• Location: Belgorod Oblast , Chernozemye , Russia , Eastern Europe , Europe
• View on Open­Street­Map

Stary Oskol Satellite Map

Popular Destinations in Chernozemye

Curious places to discover.