Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced an unprecedented move to online teaching and learning. Health restrictions demanded an immediate response requiring school-based teachers in many countries to quickly move to an unfamiliar teaching context. Established and expected interactions between teachers and students instantly shifted, changing the nature and experience of teaching. While initially confronting, many teachers had no choice but to find new ways of thinking and working as they adapted their practice. The unique online teaching and learning context created by the COVID-19 lockdowns offers the opportunity to explore the nature of teacher agency to better understand what teachers value and the support they require when faced with such unanticipated and extreme disruption. In this study teacher agency is defined as “something that is achieved through the active engagement of individuals with aspects of their contexts-for-action” (Biesta & Tedder, 2007, p. 132). Understanding how teachers managed such changes during COVID-19 offers an opportunity to gain insight about the nature of dynamic school environments and draw findings related to teacher agency which can inform future practice.

This paper reports on an aspect of a small study conducted with teachers at a K-12 school in Melbourne Australia during the first COVID-19 lockdown. The city of Melbourne provided an interesting context as it ranked among cities spending the highest cumulative days under COVID-19 lockdowns in the world (ABC, 2021). The first lockdown directive introduced 43 days of online learning (March–May 2020) followed closely by a second, much longer period of 111 days where schools resumed remote learning practices (July–October, 2020). Exploring the uncertainties teachers experienced at this time provided a way to identify their emerging areas of priority in relation to teaching practice along with any problems they faced as they tried to attend to these areas. The study also aimed to identify the conditions which enabled these teachers to determine how to effectively adapt and innovate their practice. Such insights were considered to be important by the school potentially informing future responses in times of disruption. One emerging concept in the findings was teacher agency. This concept explained how teachers were able to find ways to think and work differently. This paper draws from the work of Biesta & Tedder (2007) and Emirbayer & Mische (1998) on teacher agency to further explain the temporal dimensions which influenced teachers as they successfully navigated their way amidst the many challenges they faced during the COVID-19 lockdowns. An affective dimension of teacher thinking also emerged which was integral to the concept of teacher agency. Findings from this study add to our understanding about the conditions which can support teachers to manage and adapt their practice when experiencing disruption.

Literature review

Understanding teacher agency

The concept of teacher agency (Biesta & Tedder, 2007) provides a useful way of understanding the configuration of context and knowledge which enables action due to disruption. Biesta and Tedder (2007) theorised that teacher agency is understood as being action-based, encompassing interconnections between the environment and the individual.

The “concept of agency highlights that actors always act by means of their environment rather than simply in their environment [so that] the achievement of agency will always result from the interplay of individual efforts, available resources and contextual and structural factors as they come together in particular and, in a sense, always unique situations” (p. 137).

Agency is therefore framed as something that people do rather than have, more precisely something they achieve (Biesta & Tedder, 2007). To understand teachers’ experience of the transition to online teaching at this time, Emirbayer & Mische’s (1998) three interconnected temporal dimensions of personal agency may be useful: the iterational (past), projective (future), and practical-evaluative (present) dimensions and the idea that “the achievement of agency should be as a configuration of influences” (Priestley et al., 2016. p. 3). The iterational dimension refers to established theories of practice teachers draw upon, such as the “reactivation by actors of past patterns of thought and action, as routinely incorporated in practical activity, thereby giving stability and order to social universes and helping to sustain identities, interactions, and institutions over time” (Emirbayer & Mische’s, 1998. p. 971, italics in original). The projective dimension is future focused and refers to the way teachers determine the appropriateness of possible actions, “creatively reconfigured in relation to actors’ hopes, fears, and desires for the future” (p. 971, italics in original). The final dimension, practical-evaluative, refers to the present, and the capacity of teachers to flexibly bring together practiced expertise and beliefs in ways responsive to current situations “to make practical and normative judgements among alternative possible trajectories of action, in response to the emerging demands, dilemmas, and ambiguities of presently evolving situations” (p. 971, italics in original). While each dimension can be clearly defined, there is a “dynamic interplay between three dimensions'' (Priestley et al., 2016, p. 3).

This theoretical frame enables understanding about teacher agency under particular ‘ecological’ conditions and circumstances (Biesta & Tedder, 2007; Priestley et al., 2016). Understanding how and why teachers became successful at navigating the challenges associated with imposed COVID-19 online teaching, potentially involved an effective combination of iterational (past) and projective elements (future), with the demands, dilemmas and realities of each teacher’s lived teaching context (practical-evaluative elements). As Priestley et al. (2016) note, this combination of context and time highlights the simultaneous consideration of “the individual’s life course” and “transformations of contexts-for-action over time” (p. 6). We will now offer an overview of how teacher agency was impacted during the time of disruption.

The challenges of online learning during COVID-19

While school contexts differ impacting how teachers work and the many demands they must address, the unanticipated changes produced by COVID-19 produced many challenges for teachers everywhere. An abrupt shift to online learning for school-based education was widely experienced and even though teaching is already known as a challenging profession, COVID-19 and the ensuing lockdowns added further demands and complexity to working in classrooms (Ehren et al., 2021; Marshall et al, 2022). The initial lack of control and unpredictability of the new work environment (Kumawat, 2020; Toto & Limone, 2021) along with many teachers’ lack of experience and skill using technology (Flack et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2021; Obrad, 2020) influenced teacher experience. Some K-12 teachers did not perceive themselves as having adequate skills to use online teaching and meeting platforms (Maher & Zollman, 2021; Noor et al., 2020), while others experienced technology issues relating to lack of infrastructure and internet accessibility and reliability, in turn restricting their options for delivering online teaching (Kaden, 2020; Rasmitadila et al., 2020; Rodriguez et al., 2021). A common concern for many educators at this time was also the inequity in their students’ access to technological devices and internet connection, particularly for the homeless and those experiencing low socio-economic conditions (Ferri et al., 2020; Kaden, 2020; Midcalf & Boatwright, 2020).

The physical and intellectual demands of online teaching and learning began to accumulate impacting teacher decision making and agency. Many teachers experienced worry, a loss of hope, and a sense of being overwhelmed (Gilles & Britton, 2020; Kim et al., 2021; Obrad, 2020). In response, teacher-directed and content-based approaches for online teaching (Fullan et al., 2020) were often initially adopted. In some cases, synchronous interactions between teacher and student were replaced by the provision of uploaded resources such as timetables, worksheets, activities, and pre-recorded videos of content (Ehren et al., 2021; Millatasyifa, 2021). While younger students generally required greater scaffolding and external regulation to learn in self-directed environments (Zimmerman, 2000), a lack of parental support was commonly-cited by teachers as a challenge to achieving effective learning. Many parents were unable to provide supervision due to their own work commitments, while others did not have the skills to support their children’s technology-use (Ehren et al., 2021; Midcalf & Boatwright, 2020). Various studies suggested that even senior secondary school students perceived themselves as having inadequate skills for effective and independent learning (Bhaumik & Priyadarshini, 2020; Sulisworo et al., 2020). In sum, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid shift online was challenging and stressful for both teachers and students, requiring a shift in the way pedagogical practices were enacted on a day to day basis.

The changing nature of teacher-student interactions

The enjoyment of interacting face-to-face with students was missing for teachers (Flack et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2021; Rasmitadila et al., 2020) and there was also a lack of student motivation and engagement towards online learning (Chan et al., 2021; Midcalf & Boatwright, 2020). Many teachers found it difficult to provide immediate and meaningful feedback to their students and facilitate individual learning needs and preferences (Korkmaz & Toraman, 2020). The opportunities for authentic connections with students seemed limited and this proved challenging for many teachers. This led to tensions arising around the prolonged use of technology (Ehren et al., 2021; Ferri et al., 2020).

Some teachers reported increased workloads due to the different modes of delivery, the need to redesign their lesson content and activities, and efforts to restructure curriculum (Chan et al., 2021; Kaden, 2020; Thumvichit, 2021). Teachers also invested considerable extra time going beyond their normal teaching practices to maintain support for their students’ wellbeing (Schuck & Lambert, 2020; Sharma et al., 2022). The increased work intensity resulted in the blurring of boundaries between teachers’ work and their home life (Ehren et al., 2021; Flack et al., 2020), which some teachers described as “hectic”, “tough,” and “time-consuming” (Thumvichit, 2021, p. 25). Jenkins (2020) highlights that fatigue often resulted as teachers became fully occupied with implementing changes to teaching practices.

Despite these challenges, in time many teachers began to distinguish between beneficial and ineffectual practices. Some teachers considered the abrupt shift to online learning as an opportunity to acquire further skills (Ehren et al., 2021; Noor et al., 2020; Thumvichit, 2021) seeing value in unfamiliar experiences. Research from a rural Mexican context (n = 75), Rodriguez et al. (2021) indicates that a majority of teachers strengthened their commitment to teach, and 73% conveyed a willingness to try new online approaches. With limited institutional support, most of these teachers took charge of their own professional development. They independently accessed online resources and courses, with some undertaking higher education programs to acquire the skills and knowledge in teaching with technology. Correspondingly, a majority of teachers reported greater confidence to teach online and viewed the pandemic disruption as having a positive impact on their professional development. Similarly, in Kim et al. (2021), teachers reported gaining significant skills in creating and sharing resources, and in teaching with and managing online learning platforms. Despite the challenging conditions many teachers demonstrated an open and inquisitive mindset towards gaining digital competencies.

Teachers sought to engage students using innovative approaches in the online space. Midcalf and Boatwright reported that some educators perceived the change as an opportunity to improve or learn new pedagogical methods, to implement lessons more creatively and to “’think outside the box’” (2020, p. 28). Teachers strove to build a sense of online community with their students through ice-breaker activities to develop rapport, giving meaningful feedback and recognising student effort and achievement (Maher & Zollman, 2021; Wisanti et al., 2021). Other efforts towards student engagement included lunchtime discussions, trivia nights, and physically delivering learning resources and rewards to students (Scott, 2020). In Kaden’s (2020) single case study, the teacher provided assignments which catered for individual interests, while students submitted photos or screenshots of their work and videos of their reflections for assessment. The teacher used breakout rooms for individual instruction and provided prompt and encouraging feedback to keep students motivated. Accordingly, a mindset of engaging students through innovative approaches suggests strong teacher capacity in moving forward through personal inquiry and critical reflection of pedagogical practices.

Research context

The framing of teacher agency is particularly useful for understanding how teachers in a school in the Australian city of Melbourne found new ways of thinking and working due to the transition to remote (online) learning. Schools located within Melbourne offer an interesting research context given this city ranked as one spending the most time under COVID-19 lockdown in the world. In Melbourne, the capital city of the state of Victoria, the school year was modified for primary and secondary schools in an attempt to reduce in-person gatherings and movement into and across the state in response to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Teachers and learners experienced a number of lockdown iterations between March 2020 and February 2021 in response to state government health orders, causing schools to frequently oscillate between face to face and remote learning. The first lockdown directive introduced 43 days of online learning (March–May 2020) requiring school wide practices to very quickly adapt to enable online learning. Students, teachers, school leadership, and parents were all impacted by the nature and speed of this change. This first lockdown was followed closely by a second, much longer period where schools resumed remote learning practices (July–October, 2020). Teachers were again forced to rethink how they planned and enacted their teaching over the ensuing 111 days of online learning.

This paper presents findings from a study of teachers working in one Melbourne K-12 (elementary and secondary) coeducational school.Footnote 1 School leadership wanted to examine the impact of the first lockdown period on teacher thinking and practices within the school. Of particular interest were the conditions which enabled or challenged the teachers to transition to online teaching and also the consequences evident as a result of teacher action. Understanding the emerging tensions and enablers teachers experienced, provided a way of investigating what worked and what did not work as new and complex situations arose, and thus illuminated the conditions that contribute to teacher agency. To understand what enabled teachers to effectively transition to online teaching during this time, specifically the conditions which enabled teachers to think and work differently, two research questions guided this investigation:

  1. 1.

    When adapting to the online learning space, what tensions and enablers did teachers encounter as they looked for new ways of thinking and working?

  2. 2.

    What were the consequences of working differently (i.e. What key insights emerged as teachers reflected on this experience)?

Methodology

Research approach

Participants were recruited via an invitation email sent by the school administration. Those teachers who were interested to participate were invited to send signed consent forms to the researchers so as to avoid any coercion into the study by school management. The teachers who returned signed consent forms were invited to participate in data collection scheduled for a particular day and time, and the researchers reiterated that participation was completely voluntary and withdrawal was an option at any time.

Due to COVID-19 safe distancing restrictions imposed by the state government and the large number of participant volunteers (n = 50) and the need to gather data across a limited time, online focus groups were deemed as the most appropriate data collection tool. One 90-min data collection session was conducted online via Zoom during an afterschool school meeting. Participants included 20 primary teachers and 30 secondary teachers. Three focus groups were run concurrently, each led by one researcher, with staff being separated into one of three groups (NB the terms in brackets will be used to reference data in the findings):

  • Focus group 1: primary teachers only (FG: Prim);

  • Focus group 2: secondary teachers only (FG: Sec);

  • Focus group 3: a mix of both primary and secondary teachers (FG: Mixed).

The groups were structured to acknowledge the different education contexts of primary and secondary schooling. This approach was considered important to capture a snapshot of teacher thinking about the process of moving to the online teaching and learning space and the different issues which emerged for each group. The mixed group findings validated contextually relevant issues raised by the primary and secondary cohorts. Each focus group consisted of 15–20 teachers and this number was further separated into 4 breakout teams consisting of 4–5 teachers.

Questions in the focus group were theme based on four areas of priority which were integral to the school’s personalised learning strategy: Connect, Position, Provoke, and Shape. The language used in the focus group questions reflected the central ideas of each pillar (see Appendix 1 for the full list of questions). A final, overarching question was asked to gather teacher thinking around coping mechanisms (i.e. What has positioned you to cope with rapid change and flexible delivery?).

The Google docs platform was used to collect group data. A formatted table separated into the four key sections (i.e. question sets) provided space for teachers to record their responses. All breakout teams within a focus group worked on the same Google doc at the same time but each breakout team was assigned a colour for their text to differentiate between team responses. Teams were allocated a specific starting question and then systematically worked through all question sets in an assigned sequence. This approach ensured no team was working on the same section at the same time. Teachers were asked to spend 10 min discussing the question and then were required to record the team’s shared response in the table. A two-minute warning signal was given to prompt teams to review the text before moving to the next question set. As teams moved to a new question set, they were asked to firstly review what the groups before had written and not to make any changes to the work from other groups. Instead they needed to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed (using plus and minus signs to endorse, or not endorse) with their peers’ comments by adding a plus or minus sign next to the comments, along with any additional information written in the colour assigned to their team.

Teachers were encouraged to take turns when sharing ideas, ensuring only one person spoke at a time. Self-monitoring was emphasised to ensure everyone had a chance to share their story and avoid one voice dominating the conversation. This approach enabled teachers to engage in discussion to co-create meaning and interpretation through collective conversation, bouncing ideas off each other and voicing specific concerns in their own words and on their own terms (Liamputtong, 2016). Any identifying information was removed from the data sets to ensure participant anonymity. Ethics approval was granted from the institution’s Human Research Ethics Committee (Number 19223). Participants signed and returned a consent form prior to focus group participation.

Data analysis

Data were analysed using a grounded theory approach (Corbin & Strauss, 2008) to explore how teachers transitioned to online teaching due to COVID-19 health restrictions. This approach was chosen to examine what was unique about this experience for teachers at this school. Therefore, the analysis aimed to generate theory to explain what emerged as significant in the data. Iterative, inductive analysis was undertaken between three researchers, beginning with each researcher taking the lead with a respective data set (i.e. Focus group 1, 2, or 3), conducting an initial sweep and undertaking open coding to identify initial conceptual categories emerging from the data. The researchers then came together to discuss and compare their initial categories. Open coding enabled data to be categorised, grouping concepts relating to the same phenomena while also undertaking systematic comparisons of all dimensions of the emerging phenomena.

After initial open coding, axial coding was performed within the general codes. Subthemes were examined for connections, data became organised into abstract conceptual subcategories (Scott & Medaugh, 2017) establishing relationships between the codes. This was done to identify relationships between concepts including similarities and differences, leading to the creation of broader, core categories. The axial coding process was also iterative and the developing concepts were modified and reshaped as data were re-examined collaboratively. This led to the development of descriptions about the conditions or ‘catalysts’ which promoted or defined teacher actions, enabling identification of the tensions and enablers teachers encountered (i.e. RQ 1). Further analysis of these conditions offered identification of details about the positive and valued ‘consequences’ emerging as a result of the catalysts (RQ 2).

Findings

Three core categories were identified and developed: Teacher Agency, Community Collaboration, and Teacher Well-being. The “Teacher Agency” core category was further divided into two sub-categories: (A) “Teachers finding and enacting ways to think and work differently” and (B) “Socially constructing professional knowledge”. Theoretical ideas were then drawn from previous research to understand if the findings aligned with or added to conceptual thinking about this phenomenon.

In this paper findings from sub-theme (A) of the Teacher Agency category: Teachers finding and enacting ways to think and work differently will be discussed. Data analysis identified five key conditions which enabled teachers to develop such responsive behavior in this time of unprecedented challenges. Findings are framed under two broad headings: the conditions which supported teacher actions and the positive and valued consequences emerging as a result of the catalysts.

Teacher agency: findings ways to think and work differently

Working online, teachers were required to develop different expertise. They needed to understand how to: establish a personal presence in the online space; identify students’ learning needs relying largely on virtual connection; and build capacity to develop and implement engaging online teaching approaches that contributed to effective student learning. These new dimensions of practice also relied upon a willingness of teachers to undertake active and ongoing inquiry into their professional thinking and teaching while working in the online space.

Initial analysis highlighted that any decisions related to practice were guided by a number of personally held, strong beliefs about what mattered to each teacher when developing quality student learning. These values framed each teacher’s aspirations for the student experience, particularly in relation to effective communication, student engagement and monitoring student development and success. Teachers initially struggled to find effective ways to attend to these considerations in an online environment and were concerned that by no longer being together in a classroom there may be students ‘falling through the gap’. Teachers expressed concern about their personal ability to bridge such differences, particularly for students who they considered ‘able’ and those considered to be less ‘able’.

In the following sections we will first consider the conditions which supported or hindered teachers to adapt their practice in light of the sudden move to online teaching and learning before examining the positive and valued consequences of the change in context.

Conditions for teacher agency

Data analysis identified five key conditions or ‘catalysts’, a range of personal and social conditions which supported teachers to effectively adapt their practice to respond to these aspirations. These conditions enabled teachers to attend to other challenges brought about by remote teaching and learning. These five conditions were:

  • An open individual mindset

  • Permission to be flexible and respond in appropriate ways

  • Reduced complexity

  • Effective relationships with leadership, students, parents and colleagues

  • Parental support.

These conditions will be discussed in turn, with examples from data characterising and illustrating each. Findings about the positive and valued consequences also emerged as a result of each catalyst and are also reported.

An open individual mindset

Data analysis revealed that teachers became aware they needed to be willing to change in order to respond effectively to the sudden and imposed shift to remote teaching and learning. This reflected the requirement of a personal mindset willing to explore alternative ways of working, e.g. “It’s a NEW world now so we have to adjust and work alongside the students” (FG:Mixed), and a preparedness to confront a range of challenges, e.g. “How do we help the students who aren’t ready for independent learning?” (FG:Sec). Teachers highlighted that having a personal “desire to lift, change and develop” (FG:Prim) was enabling. Teachers also realised they needed to explore new ways of working, knowing that some approaches might not work as intended in this new environment. This required “Being open to fail” (FG:Prim). If teachers were willing to explore opportunities for change, they were also likely to respond positively to support and encouragement offered by others within the school environment, such as colleagues and team members, e.g. “Had to adapt, couldn’t get out of it. This changes a person’s mindset from an ‘opt-in’ to a ‘let’s get this done'” (FG:Sec). Teachers also found it was beneficial to ask for help, “… not just in an online space. We all need to ask questions, even when things are going well” (FG:Sec).

Being willing to embrace the unknown in the midst of imposed changes, provided an opportunity to action a commitment to student learning and exercise some degree of ownership and self-regulation of personal practice attending to that which was valued. The disruption helped teachers become aware of what they valued, e.g. “We are dedicated, adapted as required, we value what we offer to students” (FG:Sec) and “Dedicated to looking after our students no matter what timetable, circumstance, or issue was thrown at us” (FG:Sec). Framing the disruption as something ‘forced’ upon them as a collective, provided reassurance to many, e.g. “We’re all in this together = fearless unification” (FG:Sec).

Flexibility: permission to respond in appropriate ways

Teachers needed to exercise decision making in the knowledge they had ‘permission’ and support to think and work differently. Leadership within the school actively encouraged teachers to try new ideas and explore the impact of different approaches. Teachers valued being recognised as the professionals best placed to determine the conditions needed to enhance their students’ learning.

Active decision making was evidenced when teachers felt comfortable to draw on their knowledge about their students.

“Different students have different needs, especially in the delivery of information. For example, in teams, when you post information some students want to print the information, some find it essential to hear the information, some students like to see video/picture examples and some students like all forms ……. Therefore, as an online teacher we need to cater for the varying students. With regards to motivations, what I have discovered is the differing levels of motivation which can vary between the online and face to face world.” (FG:Prim)

As the online space was initially unfamiliar and existing practices did not always translate effectively, teachers responded through flexible action, changing learning agendas and objectives, realising the need for “Less chalk and talk” (FG:Sec). For example, “Learning objectives for the classes changed, because online learning is very different to face to face” (FG:Prim) and “Some things were not possible online so the agenda had to be changed to what was possible” (FG:Sec).

Teachers felt empowered when they were encouraged to draw on their existing knowledge to enhance online learning outcomes, as teachers realised they “Couldn’t get through as much as hoped” (FG:Sec)., Knowing they had leadership support, they pivoted, identifying new ways of acting to achieve desired outcomes. For example, “Often a physical demonstration could achieve more in a shorter time” (FG:Prim); “Provide a variety of opportunities. Visual, audio, projects to allow self-pacing. Accountability is important” (FG:Prim) and “Learning Intentions—need to be precise, clear language, easily communicated. These might change, dependent on the timetable—shape of the day impacted on learning intentions/outcomes” (FG:Sec).

Flexibility was multifaceted but was reliant upon permission to work differently. This condition enabled teachers to consider which of their routine theories of practice were effective in the online context and those which needed to be reconsidered and adjusted.

Reduced complexity

As much of the initial stress experienced by teachers transitioning to remote learning was attributed to a lack of experience and skill using technology, teachers valued access to ‘trouble free’, simple and reliable online processes and technology and appreciated the effective and ongoing Information Technology (IT) support provided within the school. This support was continually stressed in the data, e.g. “IT support was good” (FG:Prim).

Reduced complexity in the form of simple and clear online communication strategies assisted student learning, for example, “Sometimes at the end of your discussion the kids would say ‘What do I need to do again?’ We have clearly spoken for too long if that is the case” (FG:Prim) and “Be succinct (highly endorsed). Be direct. Keep the intro and teaching short. Keep lines open for questions and queries” (FG:Mixed).

Developing effective communication strategies was an ongoing challenge for teachers at all levels and a common theme across all groups. Data analysis indicated the need for teachers to continually practise framing clear and concise online instructions and establish associated protocols to ensure students worked effectively with tools such as online chat sessions. When teachers were able to implement uncomplicated, clear and concise online communication strategies (including explicit protocols) teachers believed this supported effective student engagement and deep learning. For example, “Quick/live feedback and response to student questions (via chat), especially outside of classroom times. Alleviates anxiety and reliance on physical proximity for assistance” (FG:Sec.); “Student comfort levels increased which enabled students to actively participate in sessions” (FG:Prim) and “Students becoming increasingly motivated to participate in group conversations and lessons” (A highly endorsed comment) (FG:Prim).

Such observed changes encouraged teachers to further question the impact of their online teaching practices, e.g. “Are we putting too much into the courses, guiding them too much, rather than letting them explore themselves? And how do we use this to create independent/self-directed learners?” (FG:Sec); “Daily planner may be too complex. Keep it simple and to the point of the lesson. Extend and support later” (FG:Prim) and “Checking on wellbeing equally with the work levels—objectives/priorities changed” (FG:Mixed). Some existing structures made it difficult for teachers to adjust their practices. The static nature of the imposed timetable did not always allow for a ‘less is more approach’ as students were locked into allocated blocks of time for learning. This format was often too demanding for certain age levels and did not always allow parent and student access to the school’s Learning Management System (LMS) at synchronised times.

Teachers started to rethink the nature and purpose of pre-existing assessment approaches, and worked to find strategies which reduced complexity to enable more effective monitoring of student development and success in the online space, for example, “Do we really need to do so much testing? How should we be assessing across the school? How important are ‘grades’? Focusing on growth more?” (FG:Sec); “Targeting feedback more carefully towards skills. Identifying skill sets that are transferable” (Highly endorsed comments, FG:Sec) and “Focus more on skills rather than the output” (FG:Mixed). Recognising the limitations of familiar practices in the new teaching context enabled teachers to identify what they really valued, e.g. “We need one organisational system which parents and students can both access—Let’s call it an LMS” (An endorsed statement) (FG:Sec) and “Ability of LMS to link to the online timetable rather than onsite timetable” (FG:Sec). Immediate and purposeful feedback became essential and teachers began to adjust familiar ways of working, for example, “Had to find different methods to gain feedback, different online spaces, quizzes, project-based learning” (FG:Sec).

While the school advocated a less is more approach to content in online learning, data analysis indicated teachers believed some parents did not appear to understand this intention. Teachers, in both the primary and secondary levels, began to consider the need for more effective communication between the school and parents to ensure that everyone was able to work together in a way that relaxed parent concerns and ensured parents were supportive of such changes, for example “Parent support is essential in also communicating to parents to understand where we’re coming from” (FG:Prim).

Teachers found reduced complexity was needed in many aspects of their teaching practice and a more simplified work environment was also valued. The online classroom became more streamlined to eliminate any unnecessary time-wasting challenges. Teachers realised that teaching online required explicit, clear, succinct and open communication between teachers and students and also parents. Any tools, strategies or technical assistance which enabled teachers to find solutions to such problems were appreciated.

Relationships (including leadership, students, parents and colleagues)

Teachers’ efforts to enact the types of teaching and learning they wanted to create in the online space seemed to be continually challenged by a range of factors, some of which have been outlined above. However, when acknowledgement and support was received from colleagues and leadership, teachers acknowledged this was extremely helpful. These wider circles of influence came into perspective and often appeared to impact each individual teacher’s personal sense of initiative.

Teachers frequently mentioned their value of collaboration and working in teams, for example “We strongly agree that team collaboration has been critical” (FG:Prim) and “We are collaborative. … Being collaborative and we value relationships – peer and student” (a highly endorsed comment) (FG:Sec). Teachers used collaborative structures for support, e.g. “Team teaching and splitting tasks was very helpful” (FG:Prim) and “Support from other team members while working from home” (FG:Prim). Networking with teachers at other schools was also seen as valuable for helping teachers think and work differently, e.g. “I have joined 5 networks where we share what we teach and are facing. Sometimes good to talk to similar subject teachers from other schools” (FG:Prim).

Teachers stressed that when they trusted colleagues and when colleagues shared their practice and ideas, this assisted them to move forward with their online teaching in ways that more effectively met the needs of their students and the overall teaching and learning needs of their school. “Trusting in colleagues” (FG:Prim) was seen as vital to success. “Decisive leadership” (FG:Prim) was valued and seen as an important part of professional relationships. Teachers valued attempts to ensure they were able to maintain ongoing collegial connections and they appreciated the “initiative and support by colleagues” and their “dedication” (FG:Prim). Relationships enabled teachers to feel more confident when facing uncertain and unpredictable aspects of their practice.

The move to online teaching also highlighted for teachers how important visual interactions were and how heavily they relied on facial and body cues when teaching in their classroom to make adjustments to their teaching. Being able to see a person’s face facilitated communication and feedback between staff and students. This was reinforced through comments above about the importance of being able to see each other and see what the teacher expected, further reinforced in the comments below, which highlight teacher noticing about the importance of visual communication cues during teaching. For example, “We love face to face, we need the facial cues to gauge how the lesson is going – too fast too slow” (FG:Mixed); “Found it difficult to give formative feedback for all students—connection reduced—some students (minority) not willing to engage in the chat often when students fell behind” (FG:Sec) and “We want it to be perfect. We also know that teaching online isn’t the best way. Therefore, we value classroom spaces and face to face communication” (FG:Sec). As some students were reluctant to turn on cameras, teachers found the chat function in online platforms important. Teachers also recognized the value and need for one-on-one communication with students. Being able to speak to students individually offered a different dynamic to small or large group communication. For example, “Text chat on Teams was really valuable for connecting with students” (FG:Sec); “The chat function also allows some students to ask questions in a non-threatening way” (FG:Prim) and “One to one chats with students would be ideal to introduce in the future if possible (Endorsed comment)" (FG:Mixed).

Receiving positive feedback from parents was seen by teachers, particularly in the primary area, as not only supportive but also motivational, e.g. “The support of parents in the process is invaluable” (FG:Prim) and “Parent support and having them visibly on side with all the change makes you want to keep going and do your best” (FG:Prim). Teachers also acknowledged that working online meant they were working within the home of school families and therefore a part of the family context. This was often also seen as a valuable way of enhancing learning opportunities, e.g. “Extended family and others can be engaged to broaden perspectives within lessons” (FG:Prim). Relationships involved many stakeholders and became the fabric of both personal and social work environments.

Positive and valued consequences emerging as a result of the catalysts

The second research question for this study was: What were the consequences of working differently? (i.e. What key insights emerged as teachers reflected on this experience?)

Analysis of the focus group data revealed conditions which enabled teacher agency evident in teachers finding ways to think and work differently. As described in the previous section, teachers began to reframe challenges as opportunities when the school and all stakeholders demonstrated trust in their expertise, were able to understand what they were trying to achieve and provided permission to take risks and try new approaches. Particular consequences then began to emerge which were clearly identifiable in the data. Table 1 offers an outline of the characteristics of each consequence.

Table 1 Consequences of working differently
Full size table

Focus group data revealed evidence of the consequences of teachers thinking and working in different ways. Technology was being utilised pedagogically purposeful ways, e.g. “Being able to use a range of resources (e.g. for Maths and Science) that isn’t available at school (can push learning in different directions)” (FG:Prim) and teachers were aware of clear and focused communication strategies, e.g. “Digital tools (e.g. emojis, buttons) can allow students to have their say without speaking” (FG:Prim). Teachers noticed opportunities for enhanced teacher-student interactions, for example, “What worked well was the bigger capacity for Tutor groups to build something more than what they had before” (FG:Sec). Teachers also thought differently about assessment strategies, e.g. “Really made us think about the structure of assessment/work. Not everything has to be ‘computer time’” (FG:Sec).

Discussion

In this paper we aimed to better understand ways unanticipated disruption influenced teacher agency and professionalism by exploring how teachers in one Melbourne K-12 school transitioned to online teaching during enforced COVID-19 lockdowns. This context provided insights about the conditions which enabled these teachers to think and work differently. Data analysis revealed findings which aligned with theories that teacher agency is a configuration of both personal and social factors (Biesta & Tedder, 2007; Scott, 2020). Teachers utilised familiar knowledge and skills in concert with their hopes and values about future outcomes for themselves, their students and their school. Teacher action in the present was also influenced by the demands, dilemmas and realities of their lived context which both enabled and at times constrained action. The three temporal dimensions, as outlined in Emirbayer & Mische’s (1998), theorising teacher agency, i.e. iterational, projective and practical evaluative dimensions were evident in the data. There was also an affective dimension at play which determined how teachers felt and thought about both the experience and their professional practice. This was also an integral part of teacher agency in this study.

Temporal and affective dimensions of teacher agency

Thinking and acting differently required the development of new expertise. The process required a growth mindset which valued thinking in different ways, and flexibility, which enabled conceptualisation of new and creative ways to adapt to dilemmas and trial new approaches (Midcalf & Boatwright, 2020; Rodriguez et al., 2021). When the shift to online teaching occurred, teachers initially tried utilising existing routines which worked in face to face learning (i.e. the interactional dimension of teacher agency). However, they soon realised the limitations of these routines. Teacher action in the present was further influenced by demands, dilemmas and realities of their lived context (practical-evaluative elements), which enabled and constrained teacher action. Teachers experienced a sense of reduced capacity, i.e. moving from being confident and self-assured about their teaching to feeling deskilled, and unsure in the new space, thus impacting their sense of agency, a finding similar to Flack et al. (2020). However, as teachers became more aware of the complex contextual connections shaping their practice when working online, they determined what was worth retaining and the aspects of their teaching practice that needed to change (Smith, 2017). The process, although disruptive, led to valuable teacher learning and development of new insights. This is an example of how teachers showed capacity to make informed judgements among a variety of possible alternatives in response to the dilemma (i.e. the practical-evaluative dimension of teacher agency).

There was also an affective dimension of teacher agency at play, defined by the way teachers felt and thought about the challenges of online teaching. A positive emotional response was critical to action and this required teachers to see beyond the initial unsettling experience of losing control (Kumawat, 2020; Toto & Limone, 2021) to reframe such challenges as opportunities for learning (Ehren et al., 2021; Noor et al., 2020; Thumvichit, 2021). This positive emotional perspective enabled teachers to find ways to think and act differently. For some teachers, achieving a positive emotional response was supported by framing the situation as a collective experience, a shared pursuit to work alongside their students. This affective dimension is a critical consideration in understanding how teachers found new ways of thinking and working. Open mindedness, acknowledgement of an opportunity to align personal beliefs and aspirations with new action, and a willingness to take risks in the face of failure, characterised this affective dimension of teacher agency. Data analysis revealed this affective dimension allowed teachers in this study to move beyond the familiar structures and routines which had previously provided stability.

Ecological aspects of teacher agency

Similar to Biesta & Tedder (2007), teacher agency in this study encompassed the interconnections between the environment and the individual. A reduction in complexity within the work environment, be it in a specific workspace or across the school as a whole, further facilitated action towards change. As teachers developed greater awareness of, and knowledge about, the complex contextual connections shaping their online teaching, they were better able to determine what was worth retaining and the aspects of their teaching practice that needed to change (Smith, 2017). They came to value trouble free, reliable and simple online structures and technology, uncomplicated communication strategies, strong routines providing a balance of online and physical learning and streamlined assessment practices. These considerations demonstrated how teachers became future focused (Emirbayer & Mische, 1998) determining the appropriateness of possible actions and bringing together practiced expertise and beliefs in ways responsive to situations. As a consequence, teacher agency influenced both teacher experience of communication, assessment, feedback and relationships and also shaped the nature of each aspect of teaching practice.

The ecological environment (Biesta & Tedder, 2007; Priestley et al., 2016) in this study also included the support teachers received from leadership, colleagues and parents. When leadership was decisive, and gave teachers permission to try and fail they positioned teachers as the actors best able to respond to the disruption, a finding similar to Sharma et al. (2022). The work of Noor et al. (2020) and Rasmitadila et al. (2020) demonstrated how teachers responded positively to understanding and support shown by principals and school administrators, and the provision of professional development, hands-on practice, knowledge management and technical resources. The same was also true in this study. As teachers believed their expertise was valued by leadership and because of this, teachers took ownership of their professional practice and engaged with the process of inquiry through ongoing critical reflection. This enabled a projective dimension (i.e. hopes and desires for the future) to come to the fore to inform approaches to practice. Support from colleagues was also important, with teachers seeking connections within and outside the school for check-ins, support and the sharing of information and insights, which was a similar finding to Maher and Zollman (2021). Positive parental feedback was also essential, a finding shared with Ehren et al. (2021) & Chaaban et al. (2021), some teachers also acknowledged parent-teacher partnerships as a vital support mechanism to sustain student learning during school closures (Chaaban et al., 2021; Ehren et al., 2021; Schuck & Lambert, 2020). Teachers often highlighted immense value in sharing ideas and resources with their colleagues (Chaaban et al., 2021; Maher & Zollman, 2021) and through these professional communities of practice, educators motivated each other and provided support to improve online teaching practices (Kim et al., 2021; Thumvichit, 2021). The social interactions were part of the ecological environment (Biesta & Tedder, 2007; Priestley et al., 2016) integral to teacher agency.

Future teaching practices

The findings of this study demonstrate that teacher agency is, as Biesta & Tedder (2007) indicated, something that is achieved when individual teachers willingly engage in taking action by drawing on the affordances of their contextual reality. A teacher’s personal willingness to change was a determining factor for successful teacher agency, demonstrating the mindset of the teacher was critical in terms of developing new and effective teaching practice. The findings also demonstrate a reciprocity of benefit to both teachers and school communities when teachers are provided with particular types of support, including permission for teacher decision making, encouragement of risk taking, clear communication and supportive professional relationships.

When acknowledgement and support was received by teachers from colleagues and leadership, this was also extremely helpful in building teacher confidence, persistence and resilience. When school leadership provided teachers with flexibility to explore alternative approaches to planning, time allocation and teaching, teachers felt supported and sometimes inspired. These conditions enhanced the likelihood teachers would feel valued and recognised as the professional best placed to determine the conditions needed to enhance their students’ learning.

In times of unanticipated and complex disruption, teachers highly valued uncomplicated, clear and concise communication. Effective communication was critical between leadership and teachers, teachers and students and teachers and parents. Such communication allowed everyone to work productively together. Receiving positive feedback from parents was seen by teachers as not only supportive but also motivational. This recognition gave teachers a desire to continue facing challenges and working to change their practice.

In the midst of facing new challenges, such as those presented by COVID-19 disruptions, teachers valued opportunities to work collaboratively with each other to manage these difficulties. Having such support increased teacher confidence to question particular aspects of their practice with a desire to enhance their teaching and their students’ learning. Interactive professional dialogue between teachers, led to the development of new, shared understandings and ways of managing tensions.

These interconnected conditions encouraged teacher expertise and enabled the enactment of powerful professionalism. These conditions develop further understandings about where schools need to direct efforts of support to enhance teacher agency. By enacting such conditions schools can work to create environments which enable teachers to effectively enact their professionalism within a disrupted contextual reality.

Limitations

The focus group method, as intended, generated information on collective views, and the meanings that lie behind those views rather than individual experiences. This was a suitable method for understanding how teachers in this school generally experienced and managed the change to online learning. However, there were limitations to this approach. Not all teachers who consented to participate were present on the day the focus group was conducted, therefore the collective view captured in the data was potentially limited by these circumstances. The use of break out rooms, as part of a focus group method enabled teachers to work collaboratively in small groups by following discussion protocols. These protocols included a requirement to discuss each question as a team while being mindful of their group interactions (i.e. not to dominate, allow everyone a chance to speak etc.) However, as researchers were required moved in and out of break out rooms, this made it difficult to consistently monitor the implementation of such protocols. Therefore some teacher voices may have dominated discussions and not all views may have been accurately captured and represented.

The endorsing of comments was a novel way of seeing agreement and disagreement across teams, but this approach did not enable the teams to share reasons for agreement. Audio recording the team interactions for each breakout team would have potentially captured explanations for these endorsements.

Conclusion

COVID-19 restrictions demanded an immediate response from teachers who had no choice but to find ways to adapt their teaching practice to meet the demands of remote learning. This instantly changed the nature and experience of school-based teaching for many teachers during this time. Exploring teachers’ responses to the uncertainty and ongoing problems which emerged, provides critical insights about teacher agency and the role this plays in navigating unanticipated change. This study confirmed teacher agency was active during this period of change and was influenced by a teacher’s personal and social contexts. Exploring these findings using temporal dimensions of teacher agency helped to explain the conditions which enabled action within this unfamiliar online teaching environment. An affective dimension of teacher’s professional thinking was also at play which often guided their decision making during this time. Teachers who were emotionally willing to be open minded about the experience, positively drew from familiar routines to generate new ways of thinking and working. This mindset enabled teachers to reframe challenges as opportunities to develop new technical and pedagogical skills. This mindset focused teachers’ efforts on specific tasks, and this resulted in greater capacity for innovation and resilience in response to tensions in their pedagogical practices.

The findings provide understanding about what teachers’ value and the support they need when dealing with change, which is important to understand and take forward as disruptions in the education landscape will continually occur. The changes to schooling imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic act as a reminder that school-based teaching is situated within a dynamic, complex educational and social system. Teacher agency, when defined as finding new ways of thinking and working, is a configuration of open mindedness, a willingness to value, reconsider, adapt and apply past expertise within a trusting and respectful environment, that informs future pedagogy.

This study has important implications as education landscapes are complex and the future for education seems to be punctuated with disruptions and challenges, understanding teacher agency within such tumultuous times is as relevant today as it was during COVID-19. The contexts may change, but disruptions and challenges, in various forms, remain. Teachers will constantly be seeking ways to enact their intentions and beliefs for teaching during times of disruption. By understanding the conditions which support and constrain teacher agency, we begin to shed light on conditions school environments can create which enable teachers to enact their professionalism. There is a need for more research to better understand ways disruption influences teacher agency and professionalism, both currently and into the future.