【网学提醒】：本文主要为网上学习者提供理解“干练型”中学英语新教师发展的关键因素之个案研究，希望对需要理解“干练型”中学英语新教师发展的关键因素之个案研究网友有所帮助，学习一下吧!
资料包括： 论文(145页60977字)
说明：摘 要：关于新教师发展和“专家型”教师的研究在国内外均较为多见。这些研究基本上只关注教师知识和教学反思这两个方面。而群体实践也是教师发展中一个不可或缺的因素。那么，中学英语新教师的发展又是如何呢？
本研究着眼于理解中学英语新教师发展的“关键因素”，特别关注新教师对自己工作的理解(perceptions)和看法(conceptions)。研究把入职五年以内的教师定义为“新教师”。本研究所称的“干练型”（“expertised”）教师是指那些“能够在特定的教学情境中及时以合适而又灵活的方式将理论实践化，或将实践理性化，又很注重群体实践”的教师。
本研究试图回答以下两个问题：
（1）优秀的中学英语教师在教学知识方面有什么样的特点？
（2）群体实践对这位教师产生什么样的影响？
本研究是一项小型的个案研究，采用质的研究的方法，对一位成功的高中英语新教师张红进行个案研究。在对她在一次县（市）级中学英语新教师培训会上的发言进行文本分析的基础上，研究者对她进行两次课堂观察，然后进行采访，并采访其同事和校长，对搜集的数据进行研究。对张老师平时实践背后的思想探究有利于对新教师培训和教师教育的研究和理解以及帮助新教师成长。
在讨论了对新教师发展的启示后，本研究得出以下结论：新教师可能成为“干练型教师”的关键因素主要有以下三个：
（1）对不同层面的知识的融合能力；
（2）理论与实践情境化的能力；
（3）知识与实践群体化的能力。
基于此，本研究建构了“干练型”高中英语新教师发展的模式，讨论了“实践”、“理论”、“理解”、“决策”和“群体”五个变量之间的相互关系。
本研究有助于理解新教师对自己的工作的理解与感知，因而也有助于他们最大限度地发展自我。同时，本研究也对教育行政机构制订中学外语教师专业发展政策、对教师教育与教师培训项目的实施提供了一些资讯。中学英语新教师专业成长过程中几个关键因素的模型的建构也证明了本研究的理论意义。
关键词：理解；中学英语新教师发展；关键因素
Abstract ：A number of studies can be located both at home and abroad addressing issues like novice and “expert” teacher development, which almost entirely focus on no more than teacher knowledge and reflective teaching. Nevertheless, communal practice has also to be an important component. But what is the case concerning novice English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teacher development?
The present case study aims to understand criticalities that make an “expertised” novice high school EFL teacher by attending to their own perceptions and conceptions of their work. By “novice”, I mean those teachers who have served no more than five years in the ELT profession, and an “expertised” EFL teacher is one who strives to “practicalise theories and theorize practicalities in context in proper, timely and flexible ways, highly valuing communal practice.” The study mainly addresses the following two research questions:
(1) In what aspects of knowledge does a successful novice EFL teacher differ from other novice teachers?
(2) What communal influences can be related to her?
The study is planned as a small-scale exploratory qualitative case study, with Zhang Hong from a local senior middle school as the subject, based on her talk delivered at the newly recruited inservice teacher education programme. The researcher goes on to observe two of her lessons, followed by stimulated recall interviews. Also interviewed are a colleague of hers and her principal. The investigation of her understanding embedded in her storied practice is very important in understanding perceptions and conceptions in teaching.
As the major findings of this study, criticalities that make “expertised” novice high school EFL teachers are:
(1) the ability to integrate different aspects of knowledge;
(2) the ability to attend to the contextualization of theory and practice; and
(3) the extent to which knowledge and practice are communalized.
Also, an “expertised” novice EFL teacher development model is derived from the criticalities of the present study.
In the light of this study, novice teachers might have better conceptions and perceptions of their work, which might ultimately make the best of themselves professionally. Meanwhile, this study offers some foundation on which to make policies regarding high school teachers’ professional development as well as to implement teacher education and teacher training programmes. The “expertised” novice EFL teacher development model proves the contribution of the study to teacher education, teacher training and teacher development theory bank.
Key words ：understanding; novice middle school EFL teacher development; criticalities
Chapter 1 Introduction
“[E]xperience alone is insufficient for professional growth …” (Richards & Nunan, 1990: 201).
This study focuses on the perceptions and conceptions of an “expertised” novice English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teacher in a Chinese high school context. By novice EFL teachers, I mean EFL teachers in their first five years of practice. (Ge, 2003: 168) More often than not, novice teachers are referred to as “inexperienced”, who are thought of as “non-expert”. It is true that novice teachers don’t have much experience in teaching, and that they are not quite expert yet. This opinion may seem more or less justified; however, quite a few novice teachers are more expert in the first few years of the English Language Teaching (ELT) profession than are others. They are almost as “expertised” as “expert” teachers. I am making this difference between “expertised” and “expert”, because, although they may mean the same thing, and although novice teachers have relatively less experience in their profession than do “expert” teachers, yet, I think experience may not mean everything. As Berliner (2001: 466) puts it, “Although inexperience is equated perfectly with novice status in a field, the acquisition of experience does not automatically denote expertise.” As I observe, there are often novice EFL teachers who are better liked by their students than do those with much longer experiences in the ELT profession.
目录：Dedicationi
Acknowledgementsi
摘 要i
关键词i
Abstracti
Key wordsi
List of Tables and Figuresi
Chapter 1 Introduction1
Chapter 2 Research Background1
2.1 Professional development1
2.2 Novice teachers1
2.3 Stages of teacher development1
2.4 Research questions1
Chapter 3 Literature Review1
3.1 Teacher knowledge1
3.1.1 Habermas and knowledge1
3.1.2 Pedagogical content knowledge1
3.1.3 Personal practical knowledge1
3.2 Reflection1
3.2.1 Dynamics of knowing1
3.2.2 The reflective practitioner1
3.2.3 Research-as-stance1
3.2.4 Theory-practice relationship1
3.3 Community of practice1
3.3.1 Learning community1
3.3.2 Community of practice1
3.3.3 Communal practice1
3.4 Novice high school EFL teacher development1
Chapter 4 Methodology1
4.1 Outline of the study1
4.2 Research methods1
4.2.1 Understanding a report1
4.2.2 Classroom observation1
4.2.3 Semi-structured, in-depth interviews1
4.2.4 Stimulated recall interviews1
4.3 Participants1
4.4 Research setting1
4.5 Instrumentation1
4.5.1 Report1
4.5.2 Observation Scheme1
4.5.3 Interview guidelines1
4.6 Data collection and data analysis1
Chapter 5 Criticalities That Make an “Expertised” Novice EFL Teacher1
5.1 Reflective practice1
5.1.1 Reflection in practice1
5.1.2 Communal reflection1
5.2 Practice-knowledge integration1
5.2.1 Theory-practice dichotomy1
5.2.2 Gap between content knowledge and practical knowledge1
5.2.3 Project-based learning1
5.2.4 Practical orientation1
5.3 Communal practice1
5.3.1 Teacher community1
5.3.2 Teacher-student community1
Chapter 6 EFL Teacher Development: A Model1
6.1 A Non-expert Novice EFL Teacher Development Model1
6.2 An “Expertised” Novice EFL Teacher Development Model1
Chapter 7 Implications1
7.1 To individual teacher development1
7.2 To the administrative agency1
7.3 To teacher education/training programmes1
7.4 Limitations of the study1
Chapter 8 Conclusion1
References1
Appendices1
Appendix I Report1
Appendix II Transcription of Lesson Observed (A) (LO-A)1
Appendix III Stimulated Recall Interview (A) (SRI-A)1
Appendix IV Interview Zh1
Appendix V Interview Mi1
Appendix VI Interview Xu1
Appendix VII Transcription of Lesson Observed (B) (LO-B)1
Publications during the period of MEd studies1
学位论文独创性声明1
学位论文使用授权声明1
List of Tables and Figures
Tables
Table 2.1 Four stages in teacher development1
Table 2.2 Berliner’s five-stage model of teacher development1
Table 4.1 Observation Scheme for the Middle School EFL Classroom1
Figures
Figure 3.1 Pedagogical content knowledge1
Figure 3.2 Novice EFL teacher development: Communalization1
Figure 5.1 Miss Zhang’s office desk1
Figure 6.1 Non-expert Novice EFL Teacher Development Model1
Figure 6.2 “Expertised” Novice EFL Teacher Development Model1
参考文献：Allwright, D. (2003). Exploratory Practice: Rethinking practitioner research in language teaching [J]. Language Teaching Research 7/2: 113-141.
Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, Memory, and Thought [M]. HilIsdale: N.J., Erlbaum.
Bailey, K. M., A. Curtis & D. Nunan. (2001). Pursuing Professional Development: The self as source [M]. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
Bartu, H. (2003). Decisions and decision making in the Istanbul Exploratory Practice experience [J]. Language Teaching Research 7/2 :181-200.
Berliner, D. C. (1988). Implications of studies on expertise in pedagogy for teacher education and evaluation [P]. In New Directions for Teacher Assessment (pp. 39-68) [Z]. Proceedings of the 1988 ETS Invitational Congress. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Berliner, D. C. (2001). Learning about and learning from expert teachers [J]. International Journal of Educational Research 35/5: 463-482.
Birch, G. J. (1992). Language learning case study approach to secondlanguage teacher education [A]. In J. Flowerdew, M. N. Brock & S. Hsia (eds.), Perspectives on Second Language Teacher Education [C]. Hong Kong: City Polytechnic of Hong Kong. Pp. 283-294.
Bullough, R. V., Jr. (2001). Pedagogical content knowledge circa 1907 and 1987: a study in the history of an idea [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 17/6: 655-666.
Burnett, B. (2003). Theorising of the other back [J]. Narrative Inquiry 13/2: 433-457.
Castejón, J. L. & M. A. Martínez. (2001). The personal constructs of expert and novice teachers concerning the teacher function in the Spanish educational reform [J]. Learning and Instruction 11/2: 113-131.
Clandinin, D. J. & F. M. Connelly. (2000). Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cochran-Smith, M. & S. L. Lytle. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities [A]. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research in Education 24: 249-305. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Learning and unlearning: the education of teacher educators [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 19/1: 5-28.
Connelly, F. M. & D. J. Clandinin. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of experience [M]. New York: Teachers College.
Connelly, F. M. & D. J. Clandinin. (1995). Teachers’ professional knowledge landscapes: Secret, sacred, and cover stories [A]. In F. M. Connelly & D. J. Clandinin (eds.), Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Landscapes [C]. New York: Teachers College. Pp. 3-15.
Crockett, M. D. 2002. Inquiry as professional development: creating dilemmas through teachers’ work [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 18/5: 609-624.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Educating teachers: The academy’s greatest failure or its most important future? [J]. Academe 85/1: 26-33.
Desforges, C. (1995). How does experience affect theoretical knowledge for teaching? [J]. Language and Instruction 5/4: 385-400.
Freeman, D. (1996). The “unstudied problem”: Research into teacher learning. [A]. In D. Freeman & J. C. Richards (eds.). Teacher Learning in Language Teaching [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. / 上海: 上海外语教育出版社(2002).
Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching [A]. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of Research in Education 20: 3-56. Washington: American Educational Research Association.
Freire, P. 1993. The Pedagogy of the Oppressed [M]. M. B. Ramos (trans.). New York: Continuum.
Fullan, M. G. (1991). The New Meaning of Educational Change (2nd ed.) [M]. London: Cassell.
Ge, Bingfang. (2001). Bridging EFL learning and teaching in high schools in China: An Action Inquiry Approach [A]. In Sankaran, S., B. Dick, R. Passfield and P. Swepson (eds). Effective Change Management through Action Research and Action Learning: Concepts, Perspectives, Processes and Applications [C]. Brisbane: Southern Cross University Press. Pp. 181-191.
Ge, Bingfang. (2003). Novice EFL teacher development [J]. Academic Exchange Quarterly 7/1: 117-121.
Georgakopoulou, A. 2003. Plotting the “right place” and the “right time”: place and time as interactional resources in narrative [J]. Narrative Inquiry 13/2: 413-432.
Goodlad, J. I. (1990). Teachers for Our Nation’s Schools [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gu, Qing. (2004). Intercultural experience and teachers’ professional development [J]. English Language Teacher Education and Development Journal 8: 1-15. http://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/ELTED/Vol8/Dec04Gu.pdf.
Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and Human Interests [M]. Tr. J. J. Shapiro. London: Heinemann.
Halton, M. J. (2004). Putting professional development into action by putting action into professional development in Second Level Schools in Ireland? [J]. Educational Action Research 12/1: 127-144.
Hamachek, D. (1999). Effective teachers: What they do, how they do it, and the importance of self-knowledge [A]. In R. P. Lipka, & T. M. Brinthaupt (Eds.), The Role of Self in Teacher Development [C]. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Pp. 189-224.
Harmer, J. (2003). Popular Culture, Methods and Context [A]. ELT Journal 57/3: 288-294.
Harvard, G. (1996). A Critical Analysis of Life-long Learning and its Implications for Teachers’ Professional Development [A]. In Sander, Theodor & José M. Vez (Ed.) Life-Long Learning in European Teacher-Education (European Yearbook of Comparative Studies in Teacher-Education –1996) [Z]. Osnabrück: Santiago de Compostela. Pp. 114-140.
Hebert, E. & T. Worthy. (2001). Does the first year of teaching have to be a bad one? A case study of success [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 17/8: 897-911.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E.& M. G. Pfeffer. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex system from the perspective of structures, behaviors, and functions [J]. Cognitive Science 28/1: 127-138.
Intrator, S. M. (2002). Stories of the Courage to Teach: Honoring the teacher’s heart [M]. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Jenlink, P. M. & K. Kinnucan-Welsch. (2001). Case stories of facilitating professional development [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 17/6: 705-724.
Jennings, K & T. Doyle. (1996). Curriculum innovation, teamwork and the management of change [A]. In J. Willis & D. Willis (eds.). Challenge and Change in Language Teaching [C]. Oxford, UK: Macmillan Heinemann English Language Teaching /上海：上海外语教育出版社(2002). Pp. 169-177.
Kennedy, M. (1990). Choosing a goal for professional education. In R. Huston, (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teacher Education [C]. New York: Macmillan.
Kindsvatter, R., W. Wilen & M. Ishler. (1996). Dynamics of Effective Teaching (3rd ed.) [M]. White Plains, NY: Longman.
King, K. P. (2002). Identifying success in online teacher education and professional development [J]. Internet and Higher Education 5/3: 231-246.
King, M. B. 2002. Professional development to promote schoolwide inquiry [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 18/3: 243-257.
Lave, J. & E. Wenger. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lightbown, P. M. & N. Spada. (1999). How Languages are Learned [M]. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. /上海：上海外语教育出版社(2002).
Little, J. W. (2002a). Locating Learning in Teachers’ Communities of Practice: Opening up problems of analysis in records of everyday work [J]. Teaching and Teacher education 18/8: 917-46.
Little, J. W. (2002b). Professional community and the problem of high school reform [J]. International Journal of Educational Research 37/8: 693-714.
Maclellan, E. (2004). Initial knowledge states about assessment: novice teachers’conceptualisations [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 20/5: 523–535.
Marks, J. 2004. The teaching police: Teachers’ laws and teachers’ lore [J]. Modern English Teacher 13/3: 5-12.
McCotter, S. (2001). Collaborative groups as professional development [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 17/6: 685-704.
Montgomery, J. (2001). The Ongoing Process of Becoming a Teacher: Essential Training Begins at Age Six [J]. Teaching and Learning: the Journal of Natural Inquiry and Reflective Practice 16/1: 17-27.
Niess, M. L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 21/5: 509-523.
O’Donell-Allen, C. (2004). Raising our voices: Transformative discourse in a teacher research group [J]. English Education 37/1: 50-74.
Olson, M. R. & C. J. Craig. 2001. Opportunities and challenges in the development of teachers’ knowledge: the development of narrative authority through knowledge communities [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 17: 667-684.
Palmer, P. J. (1998). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher''s Life [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Parker, W. C. (1984). Developing teachers’ decision making [J]. Journal of Experimental Education 52/4: 220-226.
Richards, J. C. & D. Nunan. (1990). Second Language Teacher Education [M]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1990). The teacher as self-observer: Self-monitoring in teacher development [A]. In Jack C. Richards, The Language Teaching Matrix [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 118-143.
Richards, J. C. (1998). Beyond Training [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., B. Li & A. Tang. (1998). Exploring pedagogical reasoning skills [A]. In J. C. Richards (ed.). Beyond Training [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 86-102.
Roth, W., D. Masciotra & N. Boyd. (1999). Becoming-in-the-classroom: a case study of teacher development through coteaching [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 15/7: 771-784.
Rousseau, C. K. (2004). Shared beliefs, conflict, and a retreat from reform: the story of a professional community of high school mathematics teachers [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 20/8: 783-796.
Ruggiero, V. R. (1988). The Art of Thinking: A guide to critical and creative thinking (2nd ed.) [M]. New York: Harper & Row.
Sadker, M. P. & D. M. Sadker. (2000). Teachers, School and Society (5th ed.) [M]. Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill.
Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action [M]. New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner [M]. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Segall, A. (2004). Revisiting pedagogical content knowledge: The pedagogy of cont/ the content of pedagogy [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20/5: 489-504.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand knowledge growth in teaching [J]. Educational Researcher 15/2: 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform [J]. Harvard Education Review 57/1:1-22.
Shulman, L. S. (2000). Teacher Development: Roles of Domain Expertise and Pedagogical Knowledge [J]. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 21/1: 129-135.
Simon, R. I. (1992). Teaching against the grain: Texts for a Pedagogy of Possibility [M]. New York: Bergin and Garvey.
Singer, N. R., & J. Zeni. (2004). Building Bridges: Creating an Online Conversation Community for Preservice Teachers [J]. English Education 37/1: 30-49.
Smith, K. (2005). Teacher educators’ expertise: what do novice teachers and teacher educators say? [J] Teaching and Teacher Education 21/2: 177-192
Stanulis, R. N. (1995). Classroom teachers as mentors: Possibilities for participation in a professional development school context [J]. Teaching & Teacher Education 11/4: 331-344.
Szesztay, M. (2004). Teachers’ ways of knowing [J]. ELT Journal 58/2: 129-36.
Terry, R. (1997). Habermas and education: Knowledge, communication, discourse [J]. Curriculum Studies 5/3: 269-279.
Tett, L., J. Crowther & P. O’Hara. 2003. Collaborative Partnerships in community education [J]. Journal of Education Policy 18/1: 37-51.
Tickle, L. (2001). The organic intellectual educator [J]. Cambridge Journal of Education 32/2: 159-178.
Tirri, K., J. Husu & P. Kansanen. (1999). The epistemological stance between the knower and the known [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 15/8: 911-922.
Tsui, A. B. M. (2003). Understanding Expertise in Teaching: Case studies of EFL teachers [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vandenberghe, R. (2002). Guest editorial: Teachers’ professional development as the core of school improvement [J]. International Journal of Educational Research 37/8: 653-659.
Veenman, M. V. J. & J. J. Beishuizen. (2004). Intellectual and metacognitive skills of novices while studying texts under conditions of text difficulty and time constraint [J]. Learning and Instruction 14/6: 621-640.
Vieira, F. & I. Marques. (2002). Supervising reflective teacher development practices [J]. English Language Teacher Education and Development Journal 6: 1-18. http://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/ELTED/Vol6Issue1/V6Vieira.pdf.
Wade, R. C., J. B. Anderson, D. B. Yarbrough, T. Pickeral, J. B. Erickson & T. Kromer. (1999). Novice teachers’ experiences of community service-learning [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education 15/6: 667-684.
Wallace, M. J. (1998). Action Research for Llanguage Teachers [M]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J., B. Corbin, O. McNamara, & I. Stronach. (2002). From communities of collaborative practitioners to Communities of Inquirers? Teaching, reform and inquiry in a National Numeracy Programme for primary school mathematics [P]. Paper presented at the AERA 2002 Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Williams, M. & R. L. Burden. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zinicola, D. & R. Delvin-Scherer. (2003). Learning to teach elementary science [J]. Teaching and Learning: the Journal of Natural Inquiry and Reflective Practice 18/1 (Fall): 16-23.
蔡春. (2006). 个人知识：教育实现“转识成智”的关键 [J]. 教育研究 1: 10-15.
陈振华. (2004). 论教师的理论性学习 [J]. 教育科学 20/1: 32-35.
杜秀芳、刘吉林. (2002). 教师效能感研究述评 [J]. 山东师范大学学报(人文社会科学版) 3: 117-119.
葛炳芳. (2005). 构建中学英语教学观察与评价体系 [J]. 中小学外语教学 (中学篇). 8: 28-31.
何自然. (2004). 论外语教学的逆向思维[J]. 外语界 6: 2-6.
贾爱武. (2005). 外语教师的专业地位及其专业发展内涵 [J]. 外语与外语教学. 4: 57-59.
林崇德、申继亮和辛涛. (1996). 教师素质的构成及其培养途径 [J]. 中国教育学刊 (6): 16-22.
楼荷英、寮菲. (2005). 大学英语教师的教学信念与教学行为的关系——定性与定量分析研究 [J]. 外语教学与研究 37/4: 271-275.
田杰. (2003). 反思型教师教学行为特点研究 [J]. 高等教育研究 24/1: 76-79.
吴一安. (2005).优秀外语教师专业素质探究 [J]. 外语教学与研究 37/3: 199-205.
吴宗杰、黄爱凤、郑志恋、应单君、胡美馨. (2005). 外语课程与教师发展——RICH教育视野 [M]. 安徽合肥: 安徽教育出版社.
武继红. (2003). 英语教师反思型教学实践初探 [J]. 外语界 1: 60-66.
夏纪梅. (2006). 外语教师发展问题综述 [J]. 中国外语 3/1: 62-65.
肖川. (2002). 教育的理想与信念 [M]. 湖南长沙：岳麓书社.
徐冰、姜勇. (2004). 教师个人理论与教师专业成长 [J]. 全球教育展望 33/8: 52-56.
徐建平、张厚粲. (2006). 中小学教师胜任力模型：一项行为事件访谈研究 [J]. 教育研究 1: 57-61, 87.
张莲. (2005). 外语教师课堂决策研究——优秀外语教师个案研究 [J]. 外语教学与研究 37/4: 265-270.
张正之、何美珑. (2004). 发展型教师的基本特征与培养[J]. 全球教育展望 33/8: 57-60.
郑友训. (2004). 教师团队: 新教师专业成长的助推剂 [J]. 辽宁教育研究 10: 88-90.
周燕. (2005). 高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究 [J]. 外语教学与研究 37/3: 206-210.
作者点评：An “expertised” novice EFL teacher development model is derived from the criticalities of the present study, as is discussed in 6.2, but further research is necessary to see whether the results will be generalizable. As Berliner (2001: 463) notes, “Generalizing from studies of expertise in pedagogy and other fields should have been difficult because the research methods are almost always qualitative, focused intensively on small numbers of individuals who are themselves highly unique.”
And if they will, projects using such methods as Action Research will be meaningful for novice EFL teacher development.
This study may provide insights to inform college/university EFL teacher education programmes. It is necessary for novice EFL teachers to be well aware that “[e]ffective professional development for teachers is as important as student learning.” (Vandenberghe, 2002: 655).
Tusi (2003) identified three features relating to the critical differences between expert and novice teachers:
The first feature has to do with the extent to which the ability to integrate various aspects of teaching and the extent to which the knowledge embedded in the teaching act is an integrated whole. The second feature is the way teachers relate to their specific contexts and are able to see possibilities they present. The third feature has to do with the relationship between being able to theorize one’s practical experience and to “practicalize” theory. (p. 224)
Here three things are apparent: (1) technical knowledge integration, (2) knowledge-context interaction, and (3) theory-practice interaction.
From Tsui’s viewpoint, and from the case of Miss Zhang, we can conclude that it is important that novice teachers should understand their own perceptions and conceptions of their own practice, and that they should realize their own potentials of being expertised, if not expert, teachers. Criticalities that make expertised teachers out of novice teachers are:
(1) the ability to integrate different aspects of knowledge;
(2) the ability to attend to the contextualization of theory and practice; and
(3) the extent to which knowledge and practice are communalized.
In the light of this research, novice teachers might have better conceptions and perceptions of their work, which might ultimately make the best of themselves professionally.
As is noted in Chapter 7, since knowledge as a carrier loads the different meanings of education, it is the teachers’ job to consider how to unload the different meanings of education on their students. To some extent, novice EFL teachers have their own privileges. For example, novice teachers might be better able than anyone else to perceive that classrooms have undergone a few relatively minor changes like greater informality between teachers and students, and even changeable settings; their instruction is strikingly similar but meanwhile strikingly different at the bottom of their heart!
Community of practice can mean a lot to novice EFL teacher development. Collaboration and self-regulation interact in novice EFL teachers’ professional development. They need to personalize the profession and communalize the teaching practice.
While they belong to a community, “expertised” novice EFL teachers also belong to their own practice and their own thinking. The capacity for practicalizing theories and theorizing their own practice is key to their professional development. It is like a series of their personal stories, both old and new. They need to situate and de-situate their teaching practice, reflect upon what is being done, dialoguing with what underlies our practice, which shapes and reshapes their decision-making and encourages communal practices signaling the capacity and vitality of collective practice and reflection, and which involves the practitioners’ feelings, structuring and re-structuring the theory-practice relationship. “[E]xperience coupled with reflection is a much more powerful impetus for development.” (Richards & Nunan, 1990: 201)
Of course, even “expertised” novice teachers have a gap between “rational autonomy” and “practical or real-time autonomy”.
On the whole, teacher development approaches are no technical instrument, nor are they a fixed model. They are a continuous innovation and reformation, meaning a new and totally different understanding towards education, schools and teachers as intellectuals, dynamically, innovatively, creatively and critically.
To sum up, this study helps us understand the perceptions and conceptions of an “expertised” novice EFL teacher. Of course, understanding alone is not enough; however, it is key to expertise.
With regards to novice EFL teacher development, it is important to note the following:
Once a teacher, always a learner!
Once a learner, always a practitioner!
Once a practitioner, always a thinker!
