Advertisement

TEACHING ‘OUT-OF-FIELD’ AS A BOUNDARY-CROSSING EVENT: FACTORS SHAPING TEACHER IDENTITY

  • Linda HobbsEmail author
Article

ABSTRACT

Teaching ‘out-of-field’ occurs when teachers teach a subject for which they are not qualified. The issues around this increasingly common practice are not widely researched and are under-theorised. A qualitative pilot study using teacher interviews in 3 rural schools examined meanings, support mechanisms and teacher identities associated with out-of-field teaching. A thematic analysis isolated factors influencing whether teachers self-assessed their practice and identities as out-of-field. The ‘boundary between fields’ model was developed to emphasise support mechanisms, contextual factors and personal resources that influenced the nature of teachers’ negotiation of subject boundaries and its impact on professional identity. These findings provide insight for policy makers, school leaders and teacher educators into the conditions required for such teaching to be considered learning opportunities.

KEY WORDS

professional identity professional learning rurality science and mathematics teacher teacher allotment teaching out-of-field 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

10763_2012_9333_MOESM1_ESM.docx (98 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 97.5 kb)
10763_2012_9333_MOESM2_ESM.docx (71 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 141 kb)
10763_2012_9333_MOESM3_ESM.docx (141 kb)
ESM 3 (DOCX 70.6 kb)

References

  1. Ainley, J., Kos, J. & Nicholas, M. (2008). Participation in science, mathematics and technology in Australian education. ACER Research Monograph No. 63. Camberwell, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  2. Akkerman, S. F. & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 8(2), 132–169.Google Scholar
  3. Darby, L. (2008). Negotiating mathematics and science school subject boundaries: The role of aesthetic understanding. In N. V. Thomase (Ed.), Science in focus (pp. 225–251). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Darby, L. (2009). Translating a “relevance imperative” into junior secondary mathematics and science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology and Education, 5, 277–288.Google Scholar
  5. Darby, L. (2010) Teacher Identity In and Across Subjects (TIIAS) Project: Summary of analysis. Final Report. Prepared for the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, Victoria.Google Scholar
  6. Tytler, R., Symington, D., Darby, L., Malcolm, C. & Kirkwood, V. (2011). Discourse communities: A model for considering professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 871–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Australian Education Union (2009). State of Our Schools Survey 2009. Retrieved 5 January 2010 from www.aeufederal.org.au/Publications/2009/SOSreport.pdf.
  8. Beauchamp, C. & Thomas, L. (2009). Understanding teacher identity: An overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(2), 175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C. & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connelly, F. M. & Clandinin, D. J. (1999). Shaping a professional identity: Stories of experience. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  11. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1), 1–50.Google Scholar
  12. Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (2009). Teacher Supply and Demand Report. Carlton: State of Victoria.Google Scholar
  13. Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations (2008). Staff in Australian School 2007. Retrieved 6 January 2010 from http://www.dest.gov.au.
  14. Department of Education Science and Training (2003). Australia's teachers: Australia's future. Advancing innovation, science, technology and mathematics. Agenda for action. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  15. Education & Training Committee (2006). Inquiry into the promotion of mathematics and science education. Melbourne, Australia: Parliament of Victoria.Google Scholar
  16. Fonatana, A. & Frey, J. H. (2005). The interview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 695–727). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Gee, J. P. (2010). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Harris, K.-L. & Jensz, F. (2006). The preparation of mathematics teachers in Australia. Meeting the demand for suitably qualified mathematics teachers in secondary schools. Melbourne, Australia: Centre of the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  20. Harris, K.-L., Jensz, F. & Baldwin, G. (2005). Who's teaching science? Meeting the demand for qualified science teachers in Australian secondary schools. Melbourne, Australia: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  21. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Helms, J. (1998). Science-and me: Subject matter and identity in secondary school science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(7), 811–834.Google Scholar
  23. Hitchcock, G. & Hughes, D. (1989). Research and the teacher. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Holyoak, K. J. (1991). Symbolic connectionism: Toward third-generation theories of expertise. In K. A. Ericsson & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 301–335). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Ibarra, H. (1999). Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 764–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ingersoll, R. M. (1998). The problem of out-of-field teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(10), 773–776.Google Scholar
  27. Ingersoll, R. M. (2002). Out-of-field teaching, educational inequity, and the organization of schools: An exploratory analysis. Washington, DC: Centre of the Study of Teaching and Policy.Google Scholar
  28. Ingvarson, L., Beavis, A., Bishop, A. J., Peck, R. & Elsworth, G. (2004). Investigation of effective mathematics teaching and learning in Australian secondary schools. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  29. Johnson, B., Down, B., Le Cornu, R., Peters, J., Sullivan, A. M., Pearce, J. & et al. (2010). Conditions that support early career teacher resilience. Paper presented at the Australian Teacher Education Association Conference Townsville, Queensland.Google Scholar
  30. Kelchtermans, G. (2009). Who I am in how I teach is the message: Self-understanding, vulnerability and reflection. Teachers and Teaching, 15, 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Luehmann, A. L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation. Science Education, 91(5), 822–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lyons, T., Cooksey, R., Panizzon, D., Parnell, A. & Pegg, J. (2006). Science, ICT and mathematics education in rural and regional Australia. The SiMERR National Survey. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training.Google Scholar
  33. Masters, G. (2007). Restoring our edge in education. Paper prepared for the Business Council of Australia, ACER, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  34. McKenzie, P., Santiago, P., Sliwka, P. & Hiroyuki, H. (2005). Teachers matter: Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  35. McConney, A. & Price, A. (2009a). An assessment of the phenomenon of “teaching out-of-field” in WA schools. Perth, Australia: Western Australian College of Teaching.Google Scholar
  36. McConney, A. & Price, A. (2009b). Teaching out-of-field in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 34(6), 86–100.Google Scholar
  37. Neumann, W. L. (2003). Social research methods. Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston, MA: Allyn Bacon.Google Scholar
  38. Opdenakker, R. (2006). Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in qualitative research. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 7(4).Google Scholar
  39. Panizzon, D., Westall, M. & Elliott, K. (2010). Exploring the profile of teachers of secondary science: What are the emerging issues for future workforce planning? Teaching Science, 56(4), 18–40.Google Scholar
  40. Pillay, H., Goddard, R. & Wilss, L. (2005). Well-being, burnout and competence: Implications for teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 30(2), 22–33.Google Scholar
  41. Ponte, J. & Chapman, O. (2008). Preservice mathematics teachers’ knowledge and development. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 223–261). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  43. Simmons, P. E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D., Richardson, L., Yager, R., Craven, J., Tillotson, J., et al. (1999). Beginning teachers: beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 930–954.Google Scholar
  44. Siskin, L. S. (1994). Realms of knowledge: Academic departments in secondary schools. London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  45. Star, S. L. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem-solving. In L. Gasser & M. N. Huhns (Eds.), Distributed artificial intelligence (Vol. II, pp. 37–54). London: Pitman.Google Scholar
  46. Steyn, G. M. & du Plessis, E. (2007). The implications of the out-of-field phenomenon for effective teaching, quality education and school management. Africa Education Review, 4(2), 144–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tasmanian Audit Office (2010). Auditor-General Special Report No. 90. Science Education in public high schools. Crown in Right of the State of Tasmania, Hobart.Google Scholar
  48. Taylor, T. (2000). The future of the past: Final report of the National Inquiry into School History. Retrieved 6 January 2010 from http://www.dest.gov.au.
  49. Thomas, J. (2000, October). Mathematical science in Australia: Looking for a future. FASTS Occasional Paper Series. Retrieved January 2007 from http://www.FASTS.org.
  50. van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London: Althouse.Google Scholar
  51. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and EducationDeakin UniversityGeelongAustralia

Personalised recommendations