225
areas related to O&AA, such as orienteering, challenges and walking activities. This is
important to note in the context of theorists such as Bandura, who argue that positive
self-efficacy beliefs are an important pre-requisite for change (Martin, McCaughtry,
Hodges Kulinna & Cothran, 2007). As a result of the PDP teachers
showed a greater
commitment to physical education and their own professional statement in this subject
(Keay & Spence, 2010; Kennedy, 2008b). This study showed that this type of PDP can
initiate change in knowledge and change in practice. However, it also found that a
successful PDP involves learning, and this is an on-going process, one which requires
sustainability. Supporting other researchers in the area,
this need for support, lessened
as teachers become more competent and confident and responsible for their own
learning (Armour, 2006; Armour, 2009; Betchel & O'Sullivan, 2006; Murphy, 2007;
Petrie, 2009). However, adoption and full completion of all learning outcomes at stage
2 was varied. Rodgers’ (1995) description of adoption of a new practice therefore was
partial with some teachers abandoning certain learning intentions from lessons. This
was particularly evident among the teachers of senior classes as they ‘dropped’ compass
work and map walking due to the negative feedback they received from the children and
the inactivity of the lessons. This confirms the delicate nature of change, emphasising
Guskey’s
call for reinforcement, but stressing the importance of knowing where this
reinforcement of teachers’ positive changes in teaching and classroom practices is
coming from and what type of feedback it is. This finding demonstrates that the early
change stage in a teacher can be persuaded in either direction – adoption or avoidance –
of subject matter and learning intentions based on feedback and reinforcement.
According to Guskey (2000),
practices that are new and unfamiliar are more likely to be accepted and retained
when they are perceived as increasing one’s competence and
effectiveness…new practices are likely to be abandoned, however, in the
absence of any evidence of their positive effects – hence specific
procedures to
provide feedback on results are essential to the success of any professional
development endeavour (p. 141).
As teachers’ content knowledge increase was evidenced so too was their
pedagogical content knowledge skills in relation to O&AA, with teachers adapting
content to suit their context and their class and also grouping children to meet the
children’s needs. The contextualised and personalised nature of the teachers’ learning
supported Cochran and colleagues (1993) research which states that pedagogical content
knowing is best learned while working directly with pupils in the classroom because
226
‘live teaching permits the direct interaction that shows ideas
in use and opens the way to
negotiating paths of understanding’ (p. 267). Teachers were moving from behaviourist
teaching tendencies to a more constructivist style of teaching (Kirk & Macdonald,
1998). Instruction, feedback and teaching methodologies were also expanded from pre-
PDP. Although there may have been some hesitancy due to lack of experience of the
strand, at least teachers saw and wanted to react to problems they saw occurring.
Any PDP must consider factors beyond its control, as a reason for non-adoption
of the programme rather than it solely being their experience of the PDP. Multiple
factors affect teacher’s behaviours (Guskey, 2000) and ‘not
all teachers respond to an
innovation, commit to collaboration, or construe the purposes of education, for instance,
in quite the same way’ (Hargreaves, 1995, p. 11). Changes in the personal life of one
teacher in the study impacted on her practice following the PDP. It was encouraging to
note that this teacher did ensure that the children in her class experienced the O&AA
unit by having another teacher take them for physical education, thus supporting her
value of O&AA from her experience of stage 1. A late-career teacher (teaching over 30
years) (Templin, Hemphill, Richards & Haag, 2010) felt the PDP did not influence a
major change in
his practice, even while acknowledging what he learned through
participation in the PDP. Any PDP must consider the factors beyond their control may
lead to non-adoption of the programme rather than it being solely their experience of the
PDP. Changing teaching methodologies can be threatening for late career teachers who
are often more comfortable with the traditional methods of pedagogy they have become
accustomed to (Guskey, 2002b). More subtle pressure (Kabylov, 2006) on the part of
the facilitator may have encouraged this teacher to change and apply the new
knowledge mediated as part of the PDP.
The aim of the PDP was that the teachers would teach lessons similar to those
provided as resources
and subsequently modelled, adapting them when and where
necessary.
The idea that the teachers perceived an increase in their confidence and
competence after the first stage of the PDP (indicated by teachers’ willingness to teach
O&AA again) was apparent but they still required support. This suggests that there was
a scale of motivation to change practice, with some teachers very motivated and self -
determined to change and others less so. Facilitation of discussion among teachers, who
confront similar problems
in embracing a PDP fully, can encourage change by allowing
opportunities for teachers to share solutions to problems and also to reinforce that these
changes will take time and with time improvement is possible (Garet et al., 2001).