Well Facilitated Shoptalk as Democratic Professional Development for Teachers of English Language Learners

Introduction A democratic theory of education, according to Amy Gutmann, makes a democratic virtue out of our inevitable disagreement over educational problems. She explained that democratic virtue, too simply stated, is that we can publicly debate educational problems a way much more likely to increase our understanding of education and each other than if we were to leave the management of schools, as Kant suggests, 'to depend entirely upon the judgment of the most enlightened experts' (Gutmann 1987, 11). One of the problems with a top-down, expert-centered, managerial approach to professional development is that it tends to ignore the collective wisdom of the participants. When decide what teachers need, and the teachers must comply, whether they agree or even understand, the result is what the American psychologist, philosopher, and educational reformer John Dewey would have regarded as a form of slavery. He cited Plato's definition of a slave as one who accepts from another the purposes which control his conduct. Dewey held that even where slavery does exist any legal sense, it is still found wherever people engage activities that are socially serviceable, but whose service they do understand and have no personal interest in (Dewey 1916, 98). Dewey asserted that a society is democratic to the extent that it makes provision for participation its good of all its members on equal terms and... secures flexible readjustment of its institutions through interaction of the different forms of associated life. He went on to say that such a society must have a type of education which gives individuals a personal interest social relationships and control, and the habits of mind which secure social changes without introducing disorder (Dewey 1916, 115). Unfortunately, many teachers--from Kindergarten to the university--feel their leaders do respect their opinions or ideas. Too often, decisions that directly affect their work are made without consulting them, making them feel treated like tall children rather than professionals (Sadker and Sadker 2005, 9). When the top does all the thinking and expects the bottom to do all the doing, it is a kind of slavery. It will cause most teachers to feel resentment, and some may even seek to sabotage plans for change and improvement. Democratic professional development is of the teachers, by the teachers, and for the teachers. It differs from managerial models, which often have preset agendas and provide what experts think teachers need. Managerial models are often leader-centered while democratic models are participant-centered, fostering collegiality. In democratic models, teachers determine their own needs and construct agendas at the moment of necessity. See Table 1 for a contrastive list of characteristics for managerial versus democratic models. One simple yet powerful democratic model of professional development comes from the Great Teachers Movement (GTM), which has a long and continually growing track record of success the United States and Canada. Both authors of this article are active proponents of the GTM, facilitating workshops and retreats for teachers at all levels of education various disciplines, including the teaching of English to speakers of other languages. Certainly, the theories, research, and ideas of education experts have great value and contribute much to the improvement of teaching; but experts already have numerous venues for sharing their ideas. Regrettably, some great ideas for improving teaching do get shared because they are not big enough to be the basis for a publication or a conference presentation. In reality, few on education know as much about the practical issues of teaching and learning as just about any group of teachers who are actively engaged their profession. The collective knowledge, wisdom, creativity, expertise, and genius of frontline teachers form a vast resource pool that can yield extraordinary results when properly tapped. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.