On constructs and the construction of teachers’ professional knowledge in a post-Soviet context

2017

Full text Open access: Green Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1080/02607476.2017.1355086
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This paper examines the understandings (‘constructs’) of teachers’ professional knowledge and its sources that underpin current practice in initial teacher education in Kazakhstan and in particular the way in which pedagogika contributes to these. Drawing on empirical data collected over four years, the paper illustrates the ways in which professional knowledge and professional preparation of teachers in pre-service institutions are constructed within the Kazakh and Soviet pedagogical traditions, albeit with some reference to international scholars. Teachers’ professional knowledge is formed from pedagogic theory mediated by academic staff in what is seen by many from outside and inside the country who are engaged in educational ‘reform’ in Kazakhstan as a largely didactic style with little or no critical engagement or exploration of the implications for practice. This stands in contrast with two recent professional development programmes: the Collaborative Action Research and Center of Excellence, which are focused on interactive learning and teaching, reflective practice, classroom action research, and teachers’ collaboration as sources for teachers’ professional knowledge. This paper highlights this contrast and begins to explore what happens when these two different approaches to the construction of teachers’ professional knowledge encounter each other.