Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

“I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among
teacher educators in a professional development communityq
David Brody a, *, Linor Hadar b, c
a
Efrata College of Education, Rehov Ben Yefuna, 17, P.O. Box 10263, Jerusalem 91102, Israel
b
Department of Learning, Instruction and Teacher Education, Faculty of Education, The University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel
c
Beit Berl College, School of Education, Israel

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study explores trajectories of professional growth by teacher educators participating in a profes-
Received 1 March 2011 sional development community on teaching thinking. Qualitative measures revealed a four stage model
Received in revised form of personal professional trajectories: anticipation/curiosity, withdrawal, awareness and change. The
3 July 2011
model delineates passages traversed by teacher educators grappling with complexities and challenges of
Accepted 5 July 2011
an engaging professional development experience in a communal context. All participants followed the
same four staged trajectory though individuals were located at different points on the path. Findings lend
Keywords:
support to the nonlinear view of professional development, illustrating Kinchin and Cabot’s (2010)
Teacher educators
Professional development
paradigm of backwards and forwards movements along career paths.
Higher learning Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Communities of practice
Community of learners

1. Introduction teaching of thinking. Teaching for thinking means creating condi-

In recent years thinking education has been viewed by many
scholars as a critical element in educational reform (Perkins, 2009;
Perkins & Ritchhart, 2008). The drive to improve school achieve-
ment and student motivation has included prioritizing teaching
thinking as an end in itself and as an effective means for improving
subject matter mastery (Perkins, 1992). Teacher educators have
taken up the challenge of thinking education as a goal in preparing
future teachers to engage in effective problem solving, thoughtful
decision making and lifelong learning (Tishman, Perkins, & Jay,
1995) as well as to acquire the pedagogy of teaching thinking. In
addition to creating and monitoring environmental conditions to
maximize possibilities for thinking, teaching thinking requires
direct instruction in strategies promoting dispositions character-
izing skillful thinkers (Costa, 2001). In our college in Israel teacher
educators sought to improve students’ preparation by infusing
thinking into courses.
Our understanding of teaching thinking includes two compo-
nents which Costa (2001) refers to as teaching for thinking and
tions conducive to students’ thinking, and include goals such
as engaging students’ minds with dilemmas, enabling small group
collaborations, creating risk-taking climates, and modeling
desirable thinking behaviors. Teaching of thinking means direct
instruction in the thinking process and includes identifying
cognitive abilities embedded in content followed by teaching
related thinking skills. It includes strategies for habituation of those
attitudes and dispositions which characterize skillful thinkers and
are formed over time in a variety of contexts.
The first step in integrating the thinking dimension into
curriculum involves professional development in thinking educa-
tion for teacher educators (Martin & Michelli, 2001). Nickerson
(1988, p. 6) claimed that “it is no more reasonable to expect an
individual who does not know a lot about thinking to teach
thinking effectively, than to expect one who does not know a lot
about math, physics or literature to be an effective teacher in any of
these areas.”
1.1. Professional development communities

International attention has focused on the importance of the

q “I speak prose and I now know it” (Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme, Molière).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ972 545304458; fax: þ972 26738660.
E-mail addresses: davidb55@gmail.com, davidb@macam.ac.il (D. Brody), lhadar@
construct.haifa.ac.il (L. Hadar).
structure of instructional development efforts in achieving peda-
gogic change (Avalos, 2011; Gallos, van den Berg, & Treagust, 2005;
McAlpine, 2003; Prebble et al., 2004; Stes, Min-Leliveld, Gijbels, &
Van Petegem, 2010; Taylor & Rege Colet, 2009). In this study

0742-051X/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002

Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
2 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
professional development is defined as participation in a process to
improve teaching (Guskey, 2000). Our focus on teaching improve-
ment is embedded in a broader framework of increasing knowledge
and skills, which contribute to personal, social and emotional
growth of teachers (Desimone, 2009). Traditional professional
development deemphasizes interaction among participants,
reducing the process to a purely functional activity (Hargreaves,
1994). This professional development model in thinking educa-
tion is based on a socio-cultural learning perspective focused on
becoming a community member (ten Dam & Blom, 2006). This
constructivist view defines learning as an individual endeavor,
socially and culturally situated. We emphasize professional growth
within a group in the work setting, a perspective derived from
research showing the limitations of isolated experts (Brown, 1997;
Brown, Bransford, Ferrara, & Campione, 1983). Thus professional
growth of individual teacher educators can best be understood by
actions and the social context of work and learning (Niesz, 2010).
This communal conception of learning (Salomon & Perkins, 1998;
Sfard, 1998) assumes an inextricable bond with identity forma-
tion. New ideas emanate not only from individual learning and
from interaction, creating a culture (Jurasaite-Harbison & Rex,
2010) supporting further learning.
This socio-cultural perspective suggests that teacher educators can
learn as well as teach in college settings (Borko & Putnam, 1996;
Hargreaves, 1994; Smylie, 1995). Theories of college improvement
link learning with participation in institutional activities. Both
domains stress integration of work and learning as a necessary
condition for individual and organizational development (Hargreaves,
1997; King & Newmann, 2000; Livneh & Livneh, 1999; Moore & Shaw,
2005; Watkins & Marsick, 1999). Thus, becoming a more effective
participant in society extends beyond acquiring knowledge and skills
to becoming a member of a community of practice, defined as any
group of practitioners sharing a common concern, set of problems, or
passion about a topic, committing themselves to deepening knowl-
edge and expertise by ongoing interaction toward a common goal
(Wenger, Mc Dermott, & Snyder, 2002). This social theory of learning
(Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998) has been applied to a wide
variety of settings, indicating its utility as a professional development
paradigm (Petrone, 2010; Safran, 2010; Valle & Weiss, 2010; Verma,
2010; Warriner, 2010).
Essential features of effective professional development include
teacher involvement, collaborative problem solving, continuity, and
support (Borko, 2004; Hawley & Valli, 1999; Vescio, Ross, & Adams,
2008). Because learning and teaching are major activities in teachers
colleges, the community of practice functions as a community of
learners, emphasizing interpersonal relations and reflective activi-
ties among teachers rather than abstract discussions (Darling-
Hammond & McLaughlin, 1995; Stevens, Kahne, & Cooper, 2006).
Our community of learners stimulates professional development
among teacher educators committed to infusing thinking into
teaching, a combination deemed essential by Whitcomb, Borko, and
Liston (2009).
In the past, college faculty and administrators attempted to
integrate thinking into teaching, but lacked knowledge to accom-
plish this goal. Addressing this need, we selected a paradigm which
we termed “professional development community” (PDC) which
integrates community of learners (ten Dam & Blom, 2006) and
community of practice (Wenger et al., 2002). This melding of two
models emphasizes communal aspects of learning, such as the
contribution of relationship, caring, and mutual support within the
group while at the same time focusing on professional development
of individuals within their own discipline. Thus professional growth
results from focusing on common issues of teacher educators’
professional practice. Our construct identifies a process by which
teacher educators become a community of learners focused on
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
integrating thinking education into practice. This study is based on
two separate yearlong PDC projects in which twenty faculty
members committed themselves to monthly meetings to learn
about and implement thinking education in their courses. It exam-
ines individual paths of teacher educators in their professional
development within the PDC.
This community aspect of professional development enables
collegial support for individuals. The notion of distributed cogni-
tion (Salomon, 1993) presumes that members of the community
take responsibility for their contribution to the group and personal
learning process. This analysis is bolstered by a theory of andragogy
emphasizing unique components of adult learning such as needing
to know and taking responsibility and readiness for learning
(Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1998).
The PDC in thinking education was voluntary, presuming that
adult learners must set their own goals for continued professional
development (Knowles et al., 1998). Having already examined how
the PDC works in terms of breaking isolation, improvement of
teaching, and professional development (Hadar & Brody, 2010a),
we focused this study on individual trajectories of development
within the community. The term trajectory refers to sequential
stages of learning, as shown in studies of professionals (Campbell,
Verenikina, & Herrington, 2009; Tanggaard & Elmholdt, 2007) as
well as among students (de Oliveira Pires, 2009; Harris, 2009). In
addition, the term trajectories has been used to track phases in
teachers’ professional development over time (Day, 2008).
Knowledge about career paths provided a theoretical basis for this
study.
1.2. Career paths and professional development
Effective professional development takes into account personal
and work related issues as teachers move along career paths from
novice to expert, a transition which has been claimed to occur over
two dimensions of increasing embedded understandings and skill
progression (Dall’Alba & Sandberg, 2006). Kinchin and Cabot’s
(2010) teacher development model suggests movement from
chains of knowledge to integrated nets. Both proposed structures
have moved beyond the early stage models of professional devel-
opment (Ball & Cohen, 1999; Bents & Bents, 1990; Berliner, 1994,
2001; Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986; Eraut, 2000; Leinhardt, 1989).
Despite differences in conceptual approaches, these various models
recognize the essential differences between novice practice based
on rigid adherence to rules and expert practice based on implicit
understandings (Kinchin & Cabot, 2010).
Whether linear or interactional, career paths play decisive roles
in the effectiveness of professional development endeavors. Borko
(2004) claimed that professional development is situative, and that
outcomes are influenced by personal and group processes. The
contextual nature of teaching explains teachers’ self perception as
expert in one domain and novice in another. For example, Orland-
Barak and Yinon (2005) found that mentors view tutees from the
perspective of expert, while expressing novice solutions to prob-
lems of beginning teachers.
Interdependence between personal and professional identity has
been examined by medical educators (Lown, Davies, Cordingley,
Bundy, & Braidman, 2009), an analysis which may be useful for
understanding teacher educators’ development. Progressive stages
of career development can be identified at the macro level when
examining teacher careers longitudinally over an extended period of
time (Kinchin & Cabot, 2010) and at the micro level when examining
a teacher’s professional development within short term inservice
training. At the micro level teachers have been found to follow
particular paths in adapting new methods paralleling longitudinal
pathways at the macro level.
 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
We propose the PDC as an appropriate vehicle for addressing
professional development needs of college faculty at various career
stages. Variation in career paths may explain differences in teachers
relating to innovations proposed in the PDC (Terenzio, 2002).
Examples abound regarding the importance of prior experience in
professional development. While novice teachers prefer general
over engaged knowledge in their practice (Alexander & Judy, 1988),
they experience difficulty integrating knowledge about teaching
into practice (Livingston & Borko, 1990). Harrison and McKeon
(2008) found advantages of informal learning opportunities for
young faculty, while Larkin and Neumann (2009) recognized the
importance of both life and career stages for older academics.
Our study examines teacher educators’ responses to proposed
changes in their practice within a PDC focused on teaching thinking.
We sought to infuse thinking into college courses through yearlong
professional development courses revealing thinking techniques
which could be used with students. Although the PDC effectively
broke isolation and supported professional growth (Hadar & Brody,
2010b), some participants adhered to previous teaching practices,
resisting new methods. Informed by literature on the importance of
teachers’ career paths (Kinchin & Cabot, 2010) and insights about
the significance of context in professional development (Borko,
2004), this study focuses attention on the trajectory of teacher
educators’ professional growth within the PDC.
2. Methods
The two yearlong PDC endeavors in this study followed a similar
structure divided into three stages. The first phase consisted of
exposure to aspects of “teaching thinking” (Tishman et al., 1995). At
these initial meetings participants explored current theories in
thinking education, read research and case materials from the field
and explored possible implementations. They shared their exper-
tise and experience, accessing the topic of thinking in various
disciplines. In the second phase participants implemented thinking
activities in college classrooms, encouraging further application
and interactive feedback, driven by mutual reflection. As group
members tried out various thinking routines, they documented
these experiences for group analysis and collegial discourse. The
final phase of the PDC consisted of joint investigation of pedagogy
and practice of teaching thinking through group reflection. Our aim
was understanding individual professional development trajecto-
ries as teachers experienced these PDC stages.
2.1. Data collection
Our interest in teachers’ professional development within the
group required studying individual participants for comparison.
Thus, in each yearlong PDC project we collected data on five
teachers using qualitative methods:
1. Ten teacher educators (five in each project) were interviewed
at the beginning, middle and end of the year and one year later.
A group interview was conducted at the conclusion of each
project. These interviews included reflection about effects of
the PDC on personal and professional development and about
changes since previous group sessions. The initial interview
addressed the teacher’s decision to join the group. All inter-
views were recorded and transcribed.
2. Meetings were documented by voice recording.
3. In the second yearlong project, each meeting opened with
a written thinking routine which documented teaching expe-
riences related to thinking, including changes in attitude,
structural innovation in courses, adaptation of thinking tech-
niques, and further questions.
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
3
4. After each meeting, the researchers prepared field notes
described the session and tracked long term project
developments.
5. Attendance at monthly sessions was monitored.
2.2. Data analysis methods
These data were analyzed qualitatively to identify professional
development processes and outcomes relating to thinking educa-
tion. We examined the structure of the narrative material using
form based analysis (Lieblich, Tuval-Mashiach, & Zilber, 2004),
investigating meaning in the narrative by tracking its development
over time. Our focus included awareness of attitudinal changes and
adaptation of new methods. This analytic approach highlights
teachers’ thinking about their own development rather than
tracking actual changes which occurred. Emphasizing form enables
monitoring of progression and regression in personal professional
development (Gergen & Gergen, 2000).
With narrative material, the distinction between form and
content analysis is never clear cut. Although our analysis concen-
trates on form embedded in content, it reveals progression or
regression in professional development. While in our case thinking
is the content, the professional development community is the
form in which it is situated.
Grounded theory analysis (Strauss & Corbin, 2008) was used for
open coding of interview data, generating preliminary categories
which emerged from the interviews. Subjectivity in initial category
selection was avoided by a dual method in which categories were
abstracted separately by each of the two researchers. Afterward the
lists were compared and revised to achieve agreement. After
abstracting the preliminary categories from the interviews, other
data sources were analyzed using these categories. New categories
were added if found in other data sources. Triangulation was ach-
ieved by corroborating themes found in the interviews with other
data sources. The final scheme for categorizing teachers’ profes-
sional development path was abstracted at a second phase. Based
on grounded theory procedures for abstracting more general
categories (Strauss & Corbin, 2008), we used the preliminary
categories from all data sources, in order to create broader cate-
gories including those found in the initial analysis.
Privacy of the informants was achieved by verbal permission to
record and use the interviews, the PDC meetings and by the use of
pseudonyms in all written transcriptions, including file names.
During interviews, the subjects were given the right to request that
particular material not be transcribed or used in the research
findings. These requests were honored. This procedure was
approved by the IRB (Internal Review Board) of the college where
the research took place.
Quotes from various sources were identified to illustrate personal
professional development patterns. This procedure revealed changes
in teacher beliefs and attitudes over time, thereby generating distinct
stages of personal development in the PDC. When viewed in
sequence, these stages are called personal professional trajectories.
3. Results
Working within a socio-cultural perspective, we examined the
actions and thinking of the teacher educators, within the social,
cultural and institutional context of the PDC. Group development in
the PDC has been reported elsewhere (Hadar & Brody, 2010a). Thus
the results presented here address the impact of the community
on the individual teacher as learner. Connections between the
socio-cultural framing of the PDC and individual trajectories will be
noted as each stage of the model is presented. We identified four
sequential phases of professional development within our PDC:
4 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
anticipation/curiosity, withdrawal, awareness and change. At any
period during the PDC, our informants could each be located at
a particular point along this continuum. Teachers were found to
follow identical trajectories whether or not they simultaneously
shared the same stages, which are described below.
3.1. Anticipation and curiosity
While discussing their motives for joining the group, teacher
educators claimed that thinking education is high on their agenda.
They described their approach as intuitive and therefore less than
satisfying. The opportunity to learn about thinking education
systematically within a community triggered interest and curi-
osity, and was viewed as a vehicle for realizing teaching goals,
enhancing professional improvement, and filling a gap in teaching
skills.
3.1.1. Importance of thinking as a teaching goal
A major motivation for joining the group was a commitment
to addressing thinking in college courses. Feeling that teaching
subject matter is not enough, teacher educators expressed
a desire to enhance students’ thinking abilities. In his first
interview, Tom, an instructor of educational assessment, dis-
cussed his desire to improve class discussions by integrating
thinking:
I think that the development of thinking is important for
everything, even on a personal level, and of course on a profes-
sional level. The issue of developing thinking among students
and also during lessons is crucial. As a teacher, when I lead class
discussions it’s much more efficient to have high level discourse.
If I ask the students to be involved in higher order thinking.
this of course effects class discussions. If I can acquire profes-
sional knowledge that serves the college’s interest and my
personal interest. we both benefit.
Tom feels that thinking is the key for high level class discussions.
He seeks a teaching style which models appropriate pedagogy for
students to use in the future. Bella, a language teacher, believes that
thinking improves discourse between students. In the first PDC
meeting she commented:
I am impressed with the thinking framework. and curious
about the ways teachers implement this. I think that this way is
great. It reveals the best in students. It takes their understanding
to new places. By making students think, teachers are making
the best of students’ learning. I mean in this way we improve
their ability to learn. the discussion among students becomes
very very rich.
Both Tom and Bella feel they can enhance learning by involving
students in thinking activities. The improvement of teaching in
order to develop students’ thinking skills, abilities, and dispositions
was dominant in the narratives of all informants.
3.1.2. Professional and personal growth
Teacher educators cited their own advancement as a motivator
for joining the group. In her first interview, Rebecca reveals her
expectations from the PDC related to her personal growth:
The name of our group already made me feel that I am going to
learn something important for my professional development.
I feel that in recent years I went through a process of develop-
ment and growth. I have learned . how to analyze my experi-
ences and think reflectively. This helped me grow professionally,
and I thought that a professional course with a professional
instructor can help organize my thoughts.
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
Rebecca continues by expressing the importance of group
processes to enhance professional skills.
I think I’m going to learn something important for both my work
with pre-school children and with students at the college.. My
ability to be a part of a group, to think together and to take part
in the process of understanding, to read articles that otherwise
I wouldn’t have read is very important to me. It gives me a solid,
professional background in the area of thinking education. I feel
I’m in the right place at the right time. It’s a great experience to
meet academic colleagues and to be a part of this group..
Advancing thinking education in the college is a great feeling
both personally and professionally.
Rebecca extends interest in thinking education beyond her
role as teacher educator to current work with young children. She
makes no distinction between the two roles in terms of the PDC’s
utility, indicating its high impact on her professional identity at
both levels. Like Rebecca, Bella expects that learning about
thinking will be useful in many areas. She expressed her interest
in her first interview:
I decided to join the group when I saw the notice. I like to
learn. It’s interesting, moreover this specific subject is
important because it can help in every subject I teach .not
only when you teach but also in conversations, in every
lecture you give. Personally I thought of things I could gain by
joining the group. This might be helpful in many areas and it
can also improve work I’m doing with students.. I’m looking
forward to see these changes occur. I also work with high
school students, and I think that this can be implemented in
both college and high school settings.. This is very inter-
esting and very important. The importance of thinking is
crucial for learning. I hope that this experience will give
me additional tools, and renew and improve my teaching
strategies.
Bella expects to broaden her pedagogic repertoire in thinking
education, which she deems highly salient. These tools will help
her improve professionally by renewing her teaching methods.
She shares Rebecca’s interest in using this pedagogy in domains
beyond teacher training. Hannah, a pedagogic instructor, echoes
the notion that advancement in thinking education marks
professional achievement. In her first interview, she notes that
thinking education is lacking in her own background. Expanding
the professional development theme of Rebecca and Bella, her
motivation is multifaceted She articulated the fanning out effect,
beginning with her own college teaching, moving on to her
students, and reaching the learning disabled children with whom
her students work.
I have decided to join this group for a couple of reasons. First
I have heard very positive things from last years’ participants.
I am always searching for ways to develop on personal as well as
professional levels. The thinking issue is really interesting. As
a person I act mostly on an emotional plain, a lot of psychology,
and I thought to myself that I am less strong in these aspects of
thinking. This is how I perceive myself. Moreover this is very
good for the course that I am teaching. I am really interested that
my students will move from acquiring and transmitting
knowledge to developing thinking in their classes. So I am eager
to advance in these aspects. It is very important to me.
Hannah’s recognition of the gap between her professional self
image and her actual skills in thinking education motivated her to
join the PDC as an opportunity to broaden her repertoire as
a teacher educator.
 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
3.1.3. Closing a professional gap
Participants in our group expressed feelings concerning the
importance of thinking as it relates to various aspects of their
teaching. Despite high motivation, they expressed frustration in
lacking professional knowledge to achieve their personal goals.
Based on lacunae in her training, Dana, an English instructor,
identified in her initial interview her need to develop professionally.
I decided to join the group because I think that I am a teacher who
is involved in thinking. When I saw the subject I decided that this
is the right thing for me. I think that I am trying to work around
thinking and I want to do things in a professional way. I now do
this intuitively. This issue is always attractive for me, I don’t mind
where or when, I am always happy to know more about this
subject.. I cannot quantify how much this experience can
contribute to my professional development. It is too early to talk
about that. As for now, I feel that I want to develop something that
I feel is important for me and I want to become professional in
doing it. Something that is not just reflective or intuitive in nature.
I ask myself, “What can I do better for my students?”
Tom’s second interview reveals his need to learn about teaching
thinking to his students. His recognition of a deficit in his back-
ground drove him to learn more by joining the group.
All in all I think that this subject is very very important on
a professional as well as personal level.. Through my entire
career I have thought e how do I do this, how do I advance my
students’ thinking skills? This is why I came to the group. It is
important to me on a professional and personal level; I want to
know how to do it.
These teacher educators sought professional guidance within
the context of communal learning to address an issue of great
importance. Their quest for guidance to improve teaching partially
defined their identity as teacher educators.
The first stage of the personal professional trajectory is char-
acterized by three complementary elements. One factor is an
appraisal of the topic’s importance. This assessment is coupled with
a second factor, a desire for professional self improvement. Along
with these elements is a third factor, an awareness of a background
deficit in thinking education. Viewed together, these claims form
a coherent argument for joining the PDC.
3.2. Withdrawal
Following their decision to join the group showing anticipation
and curiosity, teacher educators defensively withdrew from the
group goals, temporarily rejecting the community as a venue for
professional growth.
3.2.1. Confirmation of professional competence
For some participants the withdrawal stage demonstrated
assurance about the effectiveness of their current teaching. For
Hannah the PDC’s emphasis on thinking resemble her focus on
Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy in her didactics course, thus confirming
for her the adequacy of her own pedagogy in the realm of thinking
education. This reasoning reinforces her perception that her
teaching practice is current. In the third PDC meeting she stated:
In my case, I find that this is exactly what I have been doing each
year in the first semester. I teach Bloom’s taxonomy to my
students for six month. My view concerning teaching is that you
cannot teach in the classroom without teaching the students
thinking skills.. There is something really hard about teaching
thinking skills to the students. When I joined this group
I thought that there is something beyond Bloom. I feel that these
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
5
are exactly the same things, only we are using different, more
updated terminology. So I am satisfied because I have never
learned how to teach thinking skills to my students. I have built
it myself. Our meetings give me the feeling that I am doing it
right, that I am doing it well and I should continue.
Like Hannah, Dana also feels strengthened by the PDC, learning
new approaches which match her pedagogy. In her second inter-
view, she concludes that her practice is aligned with current theory.
All along I am dealing with the thinking issue. I have always
been doing that. I had this poster that I used in order to show
relations among elements, thinking concepts, and analytical
structures. all this was always there on the walls. And these are
things that the students imitate. My classes are not regular
classes, they are different and I am looking for ways to imple-
ment this. Mostly I am feeling that this strengthens something
that is already there. You know Moliere’s play, when someone
comes to him (Monsieur Jourdain) and tries to teach him prose,
so he says “You speak prose.” So Monsieur Jourdain says in
surprise, “Did I speak prose? I spoke prose and I did not even
know (sic).” So I speak thinking and I did not even know.
Dana and Hannah withdrew from the PDC’s agenda, which
addressed changing teaching practices. They essentially reframe
what they already do instead of examining their pedagogy and
trying out new approaches. They both claim that thinking has been
foremost in their courses for many years. Dana claims expertise in
thinking education by viewing it is a natural process, a tool for
heightening student motivation.
I have done this as a rule, naturally, because I want to make it
interesting for them. And I feel that this is a way of getting them
involved in what I am doing. I’m not teaching a course in the
methodology (of thinking) or something else like that. That’s
what I think makes it more interesting for them. Even when you
read a novel I am always trying to say, okay what do you think
about this? How does this affect you? That’s what I have done
for a long time.
Dana’s self assessment of teaching thinking lends credence to
exempting herself from engaging in transformational learning in
the PDC. Having decided that she already teaches thinking in a way
which coincides with newer approaches, she has no motivation to
learn more. Continued participation in the PDC strengthens her
withdrawal, as she identifies each new pedagogy with previously
used methods.
3.2.2. Relabeling current practice
For some teacher educators the PDC confirms their competence,
while for others it supports learning current terminology for
practices in use already without any significant change in these
pedagogies. In her second interview, Debbie, who teaches research
methodology, explains what she gains from the PDC, making no
mention of changing practice, only of changing terminology.
During the meetings I felt that I have received positive feedback
for what I am already doing. The meeting confirmed many
things that I have been doing intuitively in my courses. It gave
me definitions, a framework, something more accurate. We
talked about higher order thinking skills and I realized that this
is exactly what I am aiming for e to develop higher order
thinking skills. The notion of reflection came up quite often in
our meetings. This is what I am doing. My actions are very
reflective. What I have learned is to be more accurate in the
terms I am using. I have received new terms for the things that
I am trying to do.
6 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
Like Debbie, Tom gained insight about his own practice while
reading about the language of thinking and participating in the
meetings. He identified new concepts with what he has been doing
for years, acquiring names for his current practice and thus
heightening his sense of professional self.
I would like to tell you my thoughts. When I was a school
principal I dealt so much in those aspects of learning and
exercising. I don’t want to flatter myself, but I was one of a kind
in this respect. I dealt a lot with skills that are involved in
thinking: vocabulary, conclusions, and reasoning .. So why am
I telling you all this? Because now we are dealing with thinking,
and I read it in the article and in the meeting we talk about how
we should use again and again the language of thinking e this is
exercising and I have been doing it for ages. And you understand
that what you have been emphasizing is the basics.
For Hannah and Dana, the new approaches are seen as identical
to what they are doing, while Debbie and Tom refer in a superficial
manner to professional lingo, rather than pedagogic methods. Both
strategies lead to inaction, as teacher educators claim a newfound
self assurance that their practice is up to date and therefore
professional.
3.2.3. Evidence for current expertise
Some teachers withdraw from the PDC by noting examples of
higher order thinking among their students, thereby bolstering their
self image as thinking educators. Because the students are already
“thinking”, the teacher substantiates the adequacy of her current
achievements, however tacit they may be. Tanya reveals this line of
reasoning in this comment from the fourth PDC meeting:
I have been working with my students on methods for the
development of thinking among special education students for
a long time. I cannot tell you exactly how I do it, I am not sure
that I can. But I do it. And from the assignments that the
students hand in I can see that the students understood that
they have to think..
In this form of withdrawal the teacher educator concludes that
she has produced higher order thinking by citing an incident of
thinking without examining any teaching practice. The following
claim is made: thinking is important, my students think, therefore
I must being doing things correctly.
3.2.4. Identifying roadblocks to implementation
While most teacher educators related to their knowledge,
expertise and prior experience, some talked about external factors
preventing implementation of change. This removes responsibility
from the teacher educator to change their practice, and places
blame for inaction on others.
Rachel, an elementary school pedagogic instructor, decided to
withdraw when students complained about thinking routines used
in the course. In addition, she diminished the importance for
herself of implementing change because others in the PDC would
be doing the same thing in their courses with the same students.
She identified these two roadblocks in the third PDC meeting:
I decided not to use (thinking routines) because students tend to
complain. It is not that it did not exist earlier; I always had it, but
it was not intentional and I was not focused on it. I ask myself
whether we should all work on the same thinking tools. It seems
funny that everyone who is here goes back to his class and does
the same thing. It does not seem serious..
Dana justifies her withdrawal by mentioning time constrains as
an additional roadblock. In the third PDC meeting, she claims that
she lacks time to teach content material and to emphasize thinking.
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
She also notes that students have already learned to think in high
school, obviating the need for addressing thinking in college.
The structure of the courses here prevents me from developing
thinking. There is not enough time. The students need to attend
class, they need to do the assignments and they need to take the
test, so you cannot ask them to do extra on thinking and you
cannot count on them to prepare something from one session to
the other. So the time is really limited, and you cannot be
involved in a process of development of thinking. You can jump
once in a while to a routine (of thinking) or something like that,
but I think that when you want to deal with thinking you need
time. .You need a different course structure. In previous years
I had courses in which I could do it more. In those courses I had
more time to get involved in students’ work. You cannot do it
instantly. Also here we assume that students know how to think.
Our students are intelligent, but we can always make them
better thinkers. It is not simple with the structure that we have
here this year.
Withdrawal with its multiple rationales was commonplace in the
personal and professional development trajectories of teacher
educators. Each participant moved into withdrawal soon after the
initial stage of anticipation and curiosity. We found four major
explanations for failure to implement change, related to self justifi-
cation or external interference. Teacher educators shifted into this
passive mode as they continued to participate in the PDC. The with-
drawal stage could lead to dropout from the PDC, to a state of inaction
or to pedagogic change. Attendance records indicate a dropout rate of
20% at this stage. More significantly, most participants remained in
the PDC without significantly changing their practice.
3.3. Awareness
Some teacher educators emerged from withdrawal into a stage
of awareness of the possibilities of change. This stage is charac-
terized by insight about the scope and possibilities of engaging in
thinking education which had been addressed in the PDC. Those
who moved forward at this juncture realized that their past expe-
riences did not adequately address teaching thinking. In addition
they valued the potential of the PDC to support their continued
development by helping them acquire new skills which they said
they wanted to learn at the initial stage of anticipation and curi-
osity. The group experience helped them see ways of overcoming
external obstacles. Moving beyond withdrawal, they expressed
awareness in three modalities as described below.
3.3.1. Motivation and goal setting
After the fifth meeting of the PDC, Bella took a significant step
forward in her professional development by deciding to reformu-
late course goals for both content and thinking. Like others in the
PDC, she claimed that she was already integrating thinking with
content, placing her squarely in the withdrawal phase. Her new
awareness positioned her for making a change. In her written
reflection she stated:
I think that I am starting to be more aware of things that I do. It
did not reach a level of actual discussions with students, but for
example when I think about our discussion today (in the PDS
meeting) so I think to myself as a grammar teacher that it is not
enough for the student to know certain grammar rules if they
cannot implement them in language. So how should I change
my teaching in order for me to give them this ability, and for me
to know that they can use those skills? So I have a learning goal
that concerns the topic I teach, and I also have a thinking goal for
my students.
 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
3.3.2. Desire for using thinking routines
Another form of awareness is teacher educators’ sensitivity to
missed opportunities to use thinking routines. In the sixth PDC
meeting, Karen, coordinator of the internship program, speaks of
her frustration at having passed up a situation which would have
been appropriate for teaching thinking.
There was something that happened during class. A student
raised a topic and we had a very loud argument about it. And
I came home and thought to myself, “I could have done this
differently.” I thought how stupid I was for not using a routine to
structure the conversation and to enhance their thinking and
reasoning skills. I am thinking next time I should do it this way.
Karen’s awareness is neither intuitive nor automatic. The
reported classroom conversation was not planned in advance;
therefore, she could not have used a thinking routine to structure
the students’ discourse automatically. Yet her later realization that
such a routine could have enhanced learning in critical ways
constitutes awareness and a shift away from withdrawal. In her
third interview, Robin also speaks about her desire to use thinking
routines automatically and regularly.
What I have not succeeded in doing, I have not integrated the
idea of thinking routines. I would love to be doing that auto-
matically in the courses I am teaching here and I am not. And
even in my other classes I am not. But using thinking routines,
which I would like to do on an automatic basis,. I am not there
yet. I am succeeding in doing it in this one thinking class.. So
like that is the work (which needs to be accomplished, and) I am
not there yet.
3.3.3. Elaborated understanding of thinking routines
Robin’s awareness is strengthened through her explanation of
where she stands now. In the final group interview, she exhibits
efficacy in how she could be teaching. In the past she has sought to
integrate mathematical thinking skills into her courses, and now
she feels poised to implement this vision.
At the beginning I felt that I did have an idea of what teaching
thinking is. It has expanded. I wouldn’t say that it has changed.
Expanded tremendously from what I thought teaching thinking
was. Specifically, I’m more conscious of them now. I feel that
I want to teach them how to break down a problem and see its
component pieces and build a solution step by step, but I haven’t
even verbalized that to myself and now I can easily vocalize it,
and I have routines that I can fall back on that I can actually
accomplish that.
Awareness is a transitional phase between withdrawal and
genuine change. At this stage the teacher educators recognize that
they have acquired knowledge which they desire to use. Like
withdrawal, this stage is characterized by inaction. Knowing how to
teach thinking differs from actually implementing new teaching
strategies. An awareness of potential benefit generates frustration
which could be the catalyst for actual change.
3.4. Change
Although highly individual, the stage of awareness is accom-
plished in the company of other teacher educators, and only
afterward could actual change be achieved. Adapting new practices
was socially significant for members of the group, as they shared
their achievements with the group. Interestingly, teachers at this
final stage of development reported adopting new approaches not
only in teaching but also on a personal level.
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
7
3.4.1. Change in practice
At this stage, the teacher educators felt that their practice
changed due to their involvement in the PDC. In the final group
interview, Terry, an early childhood teacher educator, talks about
the significant of habituating a particular thinking routine.
I find myself now automatically saying. “There is no yes or no.”
My response for every answer is always, “Well how did you got
there?” And if my students come up with a statement on
something, I find myself saying again, automatically, “What
makes you think of that?” So I’m always asking them . to
verbalize reasons, not only in my classes but also in my day to
day interaction.. I see that as a profound change, I guess, in
how I receive statements.
Terry is now demanding more of her students in terms of their
thinking as she internalized a thinking routine and made it into
a habit. In her final interview, she recognizes the contribution of the
PDC:
I just finished .marking a whole pile of papers to give back to
students before the holiday e and .I made remarks that would
help them if I want them to come to conclusions, if I want them
to explain the statement that they said. So I used the terms that
we used in our course, in our learning about thinking, I used the
same terms. And even one student said to me, “Should I correct
it and give it back?” So I said, “I would like you to correct it and
show it to me. It would help you to correct it.” That’s why I made
those comments.
Like Terry, Robin feels that her teaching has changed. In the
group interview, she reports structuring a new course around one
major thinking routine. Rather than implementing one of the
routines she learned in the PDC, she created a new routine which
fits the course content and works for her students.
I teach a class called How to Think Mathematically. So in regards
to the class this year I intentionally set out to use these thinking
routines and I found that none them that we discussed in the
seminar worked. So what I did is I sort of formalized . the
thinking question I would pose from time to time, I formalize
that as my own routine, which is appropriate for this class. The
way the class always works is that we have some math puzzle,
that is how it starts, and there are always four questions: What is
the real question? What do we know? What do we need to
know? How do we find it? So I would say that in this specific
class I am really good about doing it consciously.
Both Terry and Robin are acutely aware of exactly how they
implement what they have learned in the PDC. Proud of having
reached this stage, they express confidence in their newly acquired
skills for teaching thinking. They have moved beyond the inaction
of awareness into the realm of implementation.
3.4.2. Developing new expertise
For some teacher educators change occurred on a personal level.
Kathy, a bible teacher, wrote an academic paper about integrating
thinking with bible teaching. Her newly acquired expertise enabled
her to apply what she learned in the PDC to her own professional
knowledge. Her written reflection on this process expresses
empowerment and agency.
On a personal level, I actually wrote an article recently. This is
great for me to have that knowledge.. The article is about the
importance of teaching (and) education for complex thinking.
The whole article is about giving an example of how important
this is in teaching bible. Being in that course gave me the
theoretical background in the general educational world. In the
8 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12

article I gave an example of a question which arises in studying
bible and two possible answers that are given to that question.
In the modern era you have to deal with it. what would
motivate such a position, and then take the other side. It is really
using the skills that we were learning in the course, teaching
students to look at both sides. See the beauty and the problem
with each position. The group strengthens me to write this
article. It is kind of thing that I was connected to but hearing
about it and seeing how much work has been done on it in the
academic world made me realize, wow you are really (learning
something important). The article was kind of sitting there in
my head. I said, “Wait a minute, you know what? I can use that
content as an example of how you have to teach for complex
thinking.” I really needed to develop my own thoughts about it.
The final stage of change consists of implementation of the
material learned on various levels, including actually copying the
strategies as they were presented, inventing new techniques, and in
the final case applying this knowledge to an academic query in an
original fashion. Having passed through the previous stages in the
personal professional trajectory, the teachers who reached the
stage of change have achieved the goals of professional develop-
ment in the sense that they are able to reflect on their practice and
implement change intentionally. Teachers at this stage have begun
to acquire a disposition for using thinking in their teaching.
3.5. Results summary
Table 1 summarizes our four stage model of personal profes-
sional trajectories. The model delineates passages which the
teacher educators traversed as they grappled with the complexities
and challenges of an engaging professional development experi-
ence in a communal context. Although experiencing the PDC as
individuals, the teacher educators were nurtured in their devel-
opment by the group at all stages except withdrawal, when they
stepped back from the group goals. Initially they were intrigued by
the possibilities of professional growth and change, and this
enthusiasm was universally expressed through anticipation about
the learning and curiosity about the content. Once the participants
began to learn about new theories and methods, their optimism
and excitement shifted to skepticism accompanied by positive self
appraisal about their current practice. In the withdrawal phase, the
teacher educators no longer were open to adopting new ideas;
rather they constructed protective mechanisms by which they
prevented themselves from significant learning. The withdrawal

Table 1
Summary of each of the four stages of personal development trajectory: sub categories with examples.

Professional development path

Anticipation and curiosity Withdrawal Awareness Change

Importance of thinking as a Confirmation of Motivation and Change in practice:
teaching goal: professional competence: goal setting:
“So I’m always asking
“I think that the development “In my case, I find that “I have a learning them . to verbalize
of thinking is important for this is exactly what I goal that concerns the reasons, not only in my
everything, even on a have been doing each topic I teach, and I classes but also in my
personal level, and of course year in the first semester.” also have a thinking day to day
on a professional level.” goal for my students.” interaction.. I see
that as a profound
change, I guess, in
how I receive
statements.”
Professional and personal Relabeling current Desire for using Developing new
growth: practice: thinking routines: expertise:

“Advancing thinking “What I have learned is “I thought how stupid “On a personal level, I
education in the college is to be more accurate in I was for not using a actually wrote an
a great feeling both the terms I am using. I routine to structure the article recently. This is
personally and professionally.” have received new terms conversation and to great for me to have
for the things that I am enhance their thinking that knowledge ..The
trying to do.” and reasoning skills.” article is about the
importance of teaching
(and) education for
complex thinking.”
Closing a professional gap: Evidence for current Elaborated
expertise: understanding of
“Through my entire career I thinking routines:
have thought e how do I do “I am working with my
this, how do I advance my students on methods for “At the beginning I felt
students’ thinking skills? This the development of that I did have an idea of
is why I came to the group. It thinking.from the what teaching thinking is.
is important to me on a assignments that the It has expanded. .
professional and personal students hand in I can Expanded tremendously
level; I want to know how to do it.” see that the students from what I thought
understood that they teaching thinking was.”
have to think.”
Identifying roadblocks
to implementation:
“The structure of the
courses here prevents me
from developing
thinking. There is not
enough time.”

Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12 9

stage is the most dominant change in our teacher educators’
professional development trajectories. All participants went
through this stage, not all moved out of it, and some even dropped
out of the PDC at this stage. Others remained in the group but
persisted in their mental withdrawal. Those teacher educators who
were able to move out of withdrawal became aware of the possi-
bilities afforded by the proposed innovations.
Although unable at this stage to implement change, they
emerged from the stagnation of withdrawal to a broadening of their
professional knowledge landscape (Clandinin et al., 1995), thus
affording potential for moving forward. At the fourth stage called
“change,” the awareness of the previous stage is translated into
a renewal of teaching practice. This phase takes many forms, from
surface change in terms of teaching strategies to deeper change as
evidenced by creating new pedagogic paradigms.
4. Discussion
The four stage model described in our findings is dynamic in
nature (see Fig. 1). While teacher educators were found to move
predictably from one phase to the next, their pacing varied. The
progression between stages depends on the teacher educators’
willingness and ability to progress out of the current stage and onto
new and different levels of functioning. Many teachers who entered
the withdrawal stage never emerged. We described this inertia, or
the tendency to continue with current practice, as “stasis” which is
prevalent at the withdrawal stage of the trajectory. Individual
differences appeared not only in the chosen pathways, but also in
the pace at which the teacher educators progressed. Our model
suggests that change in pedagogic methods is a drawn out affair,
a process marked by multiple decisions at particular nodes,
signaling stasis, regression, or progress toward the desired goal.
Literature concerning professional development or career path
(Berliner, 1994, 2001; Borko, 2004; Glaser, 1996; Kinchin & Cabot,
2010) focuses on the macro level of teachers moving from novice
to expert over many years of teaching. We suggest that in the
context of a one year PDC project, teachers’ professional develop-
ment moves forward and backward over the year. This micro level
of viewing professional development takes place over a relatively
short period of time. On the other hand, the same teacher educators
are each progressing along a career path over a number of years
which also reflects progression and regression, a process which
somewhat parallels the short term, micro analysis. Our findings in
the micro level support Kinchin and Cabot’s (2010) view of
professional development as a nonlinear dual processing. This
dynamic view is reflected in early research by Glaser (1996) who
proposed an oscillation model in which teachers move back and
forth between new acquired skills and previously learned habits.
The comfortable zone of withdrawal turned out to be a haven for
many of the teacher educators who chose not to adopt new
methods, preferring to continue functioning within a familiar
framework. Eventually some of the teachers began to move out of
the withdrawal stage, once again illustrating the paradigm of
backwards and forwards movements along the career path. Those
who were able to move from withdrawal to awareness advanced
toward expertise in teaching thinking. Having given up the
comforts of withdrawal, they reached out to seek new possibilities
in implementing thinking strategies.
Our findings reveal particular difficulties among veteran teacher
educators in moving beyond withdrawal, which may be based on
their professional identity as experts. Changes in identity have been
seen to affect teacher educators’ ability to advance professionally.
Referring to the contextual nature of teaching, teachers may find
themselves in an expert role in one domain and novice in another

Fig. 1. Dynamic four stage model of personal professional trajectories.

Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
10 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
(Borko, 2004). In our study, expert teacher educators are put back
into a position of novice, thus experiencing cognitive dissonance
between their view of themselves as expert and their lack of
expertise in the proposed innovative pedagogy. Uncomfortable
with the novice identity, experts reframe their current teaching,
claiming that they regularly engage in thinking education, thereby
obviating pedagogic change. This leads to stasis, a somewhat rigid
and permanent withdrawal, thus resolving the cognitive disso-
nance created by the PDC. Novices themselves are seeking princi-
ples to guide their teaching, and they find in the PDC helpful
guidance to improve their practice. Experienced teacher educators
who choose to identify themselves as experts in the field of
thinking education see little utility in learning and adapting new
techniques. Although a direct comparison of novices and experts is
beyond the scope of this study, our data suggest further research
which would allow clarification of the influence experience on the
professional development trajectory of teacher educators.
The role of the community using a socio-cultural perspective is
useful in understanding the teacher educators’ movement between
the four stages of professional development. Knowles et al. (1998)
characteristics of andragogy were apparent in the initial stage of
anticipation and curiosity, in which the teacher educators displayed
a strong eagerness to learn within the communal context as they
expressed the importance of thinking in furthering their own aims
of teaching, in improving discourse abilities of the students, and in
advancing their professional performance. Such individual goal
setting in the PDC is described by Knowles et al. (1998) as typical of
the adult learner. The function of being part of a professional,
“academic” group was clearly expressed as a driving force behind
the PDC’s effectiveness. Both veteran and novice teacher educators
focused attention on what it means to engage in the profession of
training teachers. The topic of teaching thinking challenged not
only their knowledge and skills but also their professional identity.
In response to these challenges, this identity was strengthened and
for some broadened (Goffman, 1971) to include thinking education
instead of educating as well. This process of identity formation was
enhanced by the PDC, which provided community support for this
process of self definition. As noted by ten Dam and Blom (2006)
professional growth occurs within a community and thus the
communal focus was emphasized in the rationale for our choice of
the PDC as an appropriate framework for infusing thinking into the
college culture. This emphasis bore itself out in the findings,
particularly in the initial stages of the personal development
trajectory of the teacher educators.
This communal rhetoric expressed in the initial stage is glaringly
absent in the withdrawal stage. Here, the discourse centers around
self, on personal achievement, on individual and private reasons for
not adapting new teaching methods. This self applauding blocks
learning and prevents professional growth. It is couched in non
communal terms, suggesting at this stage a lack of collaboration,
a turning inward which inhibits the expected professional learning
outcomes typically obtained in the PDC (Brody & Hadar, 2010).
The stage of awareness signals a refocusing on the communal
context of the professional development experience. Group discourse
within the PDC was mentioned as a trigger for this awakening, and as
Sykes (1999) mentioned, points to the expansion from what teachers
learn to what students learn. Teachers who achieved the final stage of
change in their own trajectory explained their accomplishment in
terms of routinely using techniques which “we” learned in the group
meetings. Use of the first person plural points to the importance of
communal aspects of learning and professional growth within
a community which breaks down isolation and stimulates learning
(Brown, 1997). Significant change involves acquiring a disposition
which includes acquiring teaching skills as well as an inclination to
engage in higher order thinking with students and sensitivity to
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
identify those situations which can support students’ thinking
(Tishman, 2001).
This study goes beyond the earlier research of Bell and Gilbert
(1994), who identified three discrete aspects of learning in
professional development: social, professional and personal. Our
analysis focuses on the tight connection between the professional
and personal factors and how they work together in promoting or
hindering change. Thus we show how personal processes cause
progression or regression toward change in practice. Moreover, the
phenomenon of withdrawal identified in our study includes not
only the restrictions noted by Bell and Gilbert, but also arguments
which teachers generate in order to distance themselves from the
goals of professional development.
An additional significant finding is the teacher educators’
reluctance to change. Given that their goal is to support change in
their college students as developing educators, their withdrawal
from the goals of the PDC is particularly significant. The need for
teacher educators to improve their own practice is stated explicitly
in the Standards for Teacher Educators published by the Association
of Teacher Educators (2009). Our understanding of why so few
teacher educators actually reach change sheds light on the need to
improve methods of professional development in order to reach
these standards.
Although the strength of our findings lies in the four stage
model which we have explicated in this paper, this study is limited
in its scope to two yearlong professional development projects
focused on the particular content of infusing of thinking into
college courses. The individual trajectories may have been influ-
enced by the content of thinking education itself. In order to
understand the impact of the PDC model on teacher’s personal
professional development more clearly, further research applying
the PDC to other types of academic content should prove enlight-
ening. A second limitation of the study is the small scale and inti-
mate nature of the college setting in which this study took place.
With certain communal aspects already in place, the effects of the
PDC on individual trajectories of development might have been
enhanced by existing cultures of collaboration within the college.
PDC initiatives in larger and more anonymous university settings
could elucidate the potential of the PDC to create community and
stimulate professional growth trajectories in the absence of an
existing collaborative culture. Plans for future research include an
investigation of the effectiveness of teacher educators’ adaptation
of higher order thinking routines in their college courses by
examining student responses to such pedagogic innovation in their
own student teaching venues.
5. Conclusions
From in international perspective, this study contributes to
a world-wide growing sensitivity toward individual differences of
professional development among teacher educators who undergo
a PDC experience in order to achieve pedagogic change. As our
results show, achieving pedagogic change involves slow progression
as well as phases of regression in an extended journey. Moreover,
achieving pedagogical change involves not only acquiring knowl-
edge about a new pedagogy but also implementing the desired
change. In that sense acting on knowledge constitutes developing
a disposition to infuse thinking into college level teaching.
The socio-cultural perspective of the PDC contributes to the rele-
vance of this study beyond the bounds of its context. Although pacing
may vary and pathways differ due to individual choices, the basic
patterns established in this paper pave the way for further research
into the importance of teacher educators’ personal pathways in their
own growth and development as competent professionals. Further-
more, our focus on actual understandings and behaviors of teacher
 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
educators who choose to participate in a professional development
project can help policy makers appreciate and deal with resistance to
the adaptation of proposed innovations.
References
Alexander, P., & Judy, J. (1988). The interaction of domain-specific and strategic
knowledge in academic performance. Review of Educational Research, 58,
375e404.
Association of Teacher Educators. (2009). The teacher educator standards. Available
online at www.ate1.org/pubs/Why_the_Standards.cfm Accessed 10.03.09.
Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in teaching and teacher
education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 10e20.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice developing practitioners:
toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes, &
L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of
policy and practice (pp. 3e32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bell, B., & Gilbert, J. (1994). Teacher development as professional, personal, and
social development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(5), 483e497.
Bents, M., & Bents, R. (1990). Perceptions of good teaching among novice’ advanced
beginner and expert teachers. Paper presented at meetings of the American
Educational Research Association, Boston, MA, April 1990.
Berliner, D. C. (1994). Expertise: the wonder of exemplary performances. In
J. N. Manigieri, & C. Collins Block (Eds.), Creating powerful thinking in teachers
and students: Diverse perspectives (pp. 161e186). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace
College.
Berliner, D. C. (2001). Learning about and learning from expert teachers. Interna-
tional Journal of Educational Research, 35(5), 463e482.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: mapping the
terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3e15.
Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfree
(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673e708). New York, NY: Simon
and Schuster.
Brody, D., & Hadar, L. L. (2010). I speak prose and I now know it. Personal develop-
ment trajectories among teacher educators in a professional development
community. Paper presented at the teacher and teaching education sig confer-
ence: future Visions for learning and teaching conference. Helsinki, Finland.
Brown, A. L. (1997). Transforming schools into communities of thinking and
learning about serious matters. American Psychologist, 52(4), 399e413.
Brown, A. L., Bransford, J. D., Ferrara, R. A., & Campione, J. C. (1983). Learning,
remembering, and understanding. In J. H. Flavell, & M. Markman (Eds.),
Cognitive development (4th ed.).. Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3 (pp.
77e166) New York, NY: Wiley.
Campbell, M., Verenikina, I., & Herrington, A. (2009). Intersection of trajectories:
a newcomer in a community of practice. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(8),
647e657.
Clandinin, J. D., Michael Connelly, F., & Soltis, J. F. (1995). In Teachers’ professional
knowledge landscapes. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Costa, A. L. (2001). Teaching for, of and about thinking. In L. Costa (Ed.), Developing
minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. VA: ASCD.
Dall’Alba, G., & Sandberg, J. (2006). Unveiling professional development: a critical
view of stage models. Review of Educational Research, 76, 383e412.
Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995, April). Policies that support
professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 597e604.
Day, C. (2008). Committed for life? Variations in teachers’ work, lives and effec-
tiveness. Journal of Educational Change, 9(3), 243e260.
de Oliveira Pires, A. (2009). Higher education and adult motivation towards lifelong
learning: an empirical analysis of university post-graduates perspectives.
European Journal of Vocational Training, 46(1), 129e150.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional devel-
opment: toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational
Researcher, 38(3), 181e199.
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human
intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: The Free Press.
Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113e136.
Gallos, M. R., van den Berg, E., & Treagust, D. F. (2005). The effect of integrated course
and faculty development: experiences of a university chemistry department in
the Philippines. International Journal of Science Education, 27(8), 985e1006.
Gergen, M. M., & Gergen, K. J. (2000). Qualitative inquiry: tensions and trans-
formations. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research (2nd ed.). (pp. 1025e1046) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Glaser, R. (1996). Changing the agency for learning: acquiring expert performance.
In K. A. Ericsson (Ed.), The road to excellence: The acquisition of expert perfor-
mance in the arts and sciences, sports, and games (pp. 303).
Goffman, E. (1971). The presentation of self in everyday life. Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA.:
Corwin Press.
Hadar, L., & Brody, D. (2010a). From isolation to symphonic harmony: Building
a community of learners among teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 26(8), 1641e1651.
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
11
Hadar, L. L., & Brody. D. (2010b). Moving from withdrawal to awareness and change:
transformational learning among teacher educators. Paper presented at the
European association for practitioner research on improving learning in
educational and professional practice: challenges in professional learning
across disciplines. Lisbon, Portugal.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). The new professionalism: the synthesis of professional and
institutional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10, 423e438.
Hargreaves, A. (1997). From reform to renewal: a new deal for a new age. In
A. Hargreaves, & R. Evans (Eds.), Beyond educational reform: Bringing teachers
back in (pp. 105e125). Buckingham: Open University Press.
Harris, R. (2009). Two worlds? Higher education and post-school VET in Australia
and the movement of learners between them. European Journal of Vocational
Training, 46(1), 66e88.
Harrison, J., & McKeon, F. (2008). The formal and situated learning of beginning
teacher educators in England: identifying characteristics for successful induc-
tion in the transition from workplace in school to workplace in higher educa-
tion. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(2), 151e168.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of effective professional develop-
ment: a new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond, & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as
the learning profession (pp. 127e150). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Jurasaite-Harbison, E., & Rex, L. A. (2010). School cultures as contexts for informal
teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(2), 267e277.
Kinchin, I. M., & Cabot, L. B. (2010). Reconsidering the dimensions of expertise: from
linear stages towards dual processing. London Review of Education, 8(2),
153e166.
King, M. B., & Newmann, F. M. (2000). Will teacher learning advance school goals?
Phi Delta Kappan, 81(8), 576e580.
Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner. Houston, TX:
Gulf Publishing.
Larkin, J., & Neumann, R. (2009). Older academics and career management: an inter-
disciplinary discussion. Australian Journal of Career Development, 18(3), 29e39.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Leinhardt, G. (1989). Math lessons: a contrast of novice and expert competence.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 52e75.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (2004). Narrative research: Reading
analysis and interpretationIn Applied social research methods series, Vol. 47.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Livingston, C., & Borko, H. (1990). High school mathematics review lessons: expert/
novice distinctions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 372e387.
Livneh, C., & Livneh, H. (1999). Continuing professional education among educators:
predictors of participation in learning activities. Adult Education Quarterly,
49(2), 91e106.
Lown, N., Davies, I., Cordingley, L., Bundy, C., & Braidman, I. (2009). Development of
a method to investigate medical students’ perceptions of their personal and
professional development. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14(4),
475e486.
Martin, D. S., & Michelli, N. M. (2001). Preparing teachers of thinking. In L. Costa
(Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. VA: ASCD.
McAlpine, L. (2003). Het belang vanonderwijskundige vorming voor studentge-
centreerdonderwijs: de praktijk geëvalueerd. [The importance of instructional
development for student centered teaching: an examination of practice]. In
N. Druine, M. Clement, & M. K. Waeytens (Eds.), Dynamiek in het hoger onder-
wijs. Uitdagingen voor onderwijsondersteuning [Dynamics in higher education:
Challenges for teaching support] (pp. 57e71). Leuven: Universitaire Pers.
Moore, S., & Shaw, P. (2005). The professional learning needs and perceptions of
secondary school teachers: implications for professional learning community.
Paper presented at the annual AERA conference, New Orleans, LA, April 2005.
Nickerson, R. (1988). On improving thinking through instruction. Review of Research
in Education, 15, 3e57.
Niesz, T. (2010). Chasms and bridges: generativity is the space between educators’
communities of practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(1), 37e44.
Orland-Barak, L., & Yinon, H. (2005). Sometimes a novice and sometimes an expert:
mentors’ professional expertise as revealed through their stories of critical
incidents. Oxford Review of Education, 31(4), 557e578.
Perkins, D. (2009). Making learning whole: How seven principles of teaching can
transform education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Perkins, D. N. (1992). Smart schools: Better thinking and learning for every child. New
York, NY: Free Press.
Perkins, D. N., & Ritchhart, R. (2008). Making thinking visible. Educational Leader-
ship, 65(5), 57e63.
Petrone, R. (2010). “You have to get hit a couple of times”: the role of conflict in
learning how to “be” a skateboarder. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(1),
119e127.
Prebble, T., Hargraves, H., Leach, L., Naidoo, K., Suddaby, G., & Zepke, N. (2004).
Impact of student support services and academic development programmes on
student outcomes in undergraduate tertiary study: A synthesis of the research.
Report to the Ministry of Education. Massey University College of Education.
Safran, L. (2010). Legitimate peripheral participation and home education. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 26(1), 107e112.
Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational
considerations. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. In
P. D. Pearson, & A. Iran-Nejad (Eds.), Review of research in education. Wash-
ington, DC: AERA.
12 D. Brody, L. Hadar / Teaching and Teacher Education xxx (2011) 1e12
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just
one. Educational Researcher, 27, 4e13.
Smylie, M. A. (1995). New perspective on teacher leadership. Elementary School
Journal, 96, 3e7.
Stes, A., Min-Leliveld, M., Gijbels, D., & Van Petegem, P. (2010). The impact of
instructional development in higher education: the state-of-the-art of the
research. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 25e49.
Stevens, W. D., Kahne, J., & Cooper, L. (2006). Professional communities and
instructional improvement practices: A study of small high schools in Chicago.
Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and proce-
dures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Sykes, G. (1999). Teacher and student learning: strengthening their connection. In
L. Darling-Hammond, & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp.
151e180). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tanggaard, L., & Elmholdt, C. (2007). Learning trajectories among educational
psychologists. Studies in Continuing Education, 29(3), 295e314.
Taylor, L., & Rege Colet, N. (2009). Making the shift from faculty development to
educational development: a conceptual framework grounded in practice. In
A. Saroyan, & M. Frenay (Eds.), Building teaching capacities in higher education:
A comprehensive international model. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
ten Dam, G. T. M., & Blom, S. (2006). Learning through participation. The potential of
school-based teacher education for developing a professional identity. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 22, 647e660.
Terenzio, M. (2002). Professional development across the faculty career: an engine
for implementing a new faculty-institutional compact. In L. A. McMillin, &
W. G. Berberet (Eds.), A new academic compact: Revisioning the relationship
Please cite this article in press as: Brody, D., & Hadar, L., “I speak prose and I now know it.” Personal development trajectories among teacher
educators in a professional development community, Teaching and Teacher Education (2011), doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002
between faculty and their institutions (pp. 29e60). Williston, VT: Anker
Publishing.
Tishman, S. (2001). Added value: a dispositional perspective on thinking. In
A. L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds, a resource book for teaching thinking (pp.
72e75). Alexandria, Va.: ASCD.
Tishman, S., Perkins, D. N., & Jay, E. (1995). The thinking classroom: Learning and
teaching in a culture of thinking. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Valle, I., & Weiss, E. (2010). Participation in the figured world of graffiti. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 26(1), 128e135.
Verma, M. (2010). The education of Hindu priests in the Diaspora: assessing the value
of community of practice theory. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(1), 11e21.
Vescio, V., Ross, D., & Adams, A. (2008). Review of research on the impact of
professional learning communities on teaching and student learning. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 24(1), 80e91.
Warriner, D. S. (2010). Competent performances of situated identities: adult
learners of English accessing engaged participation. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 26(1), 22e30.
Watkins, E. K., & Marsick, J. V. (1999). Sculpting the learning community: new forms
of working and organizing. NASSP Bulletin, 83(604), 78.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Wenger, E., Mc Dermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of
practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School
Press.
Whitcomb, J., Borko, H., & Liston, D. (2009). Growing talent, promising professional
development models and practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(3),
207e212.