Over the past decade or so various studies and reports have highlighted the central role that teachers play in providing positive learning experiences to all children.
In spite of this knowledge and understanding and around a decade of ongoing educational reform, it is only now that policy makers are realising in hindsight what should have been clear from the start: most schools and teachers cannot produce the kind of learning demanded by the new reforms. This is not because they do not want to, but because they either do not know how, or they feel a sense of trepidation on taking that first step, and/or because the systems in which they work do not support them in doing so.
Hence, the constant hiccups that we hear of as particular decisions are taken by the education authorities and the Malta Union of Teachers stops them before they even see the light of day. This goes to show the lack of understanding and ownership of the National Minimum Curriculum that we are all supposedly in favour of.
Thus, the need to better understand teachers' development and their work has acquired special urgency as the important linkage between teachers' learning and curriculum implementation, student achievement, school change and organisational learning has been recognised.
What teachers know and can do makes the crucial difference in what children learn. Standards for students and teachers are the key to reforming Maltese education. Students have the right to be taught by competent teachers and teachers should have the right to high-quality preparation, induction and ongoing professional development (Bezzina, 2002).
Teachers are currently licensed based on successful completion of the four-year B.Ed (Hons) programme or the one-year PGCE course. Teachers are certified based on demonstrated performance, including tests of subject matter, teaching knowledge and teaching skills, and competence in areas such as the curriculum, assessment, psychology, philosophy, sociology and research.
However, as experience shows us, a lot of what is covered and is expected of student teachers during teaching practice is often dropped at the wayside by quite a number of graduates within months if not weeks of being awarded a full-time job. So, what is meant to be a formative experience which gradually induces student teachers into a lifelong profession, with all that this implies, is lost. As teacher educators we need to raise questions and not take this lightly or accept this as a natural phenomenon.
This is where the "rethinking" has to take place. The standards that are set at the pre-service stage need to spill into the induction stage and these into the continuing professional development stage.
Thus, standards would set out clear expectations for teachers (and others) at key points in the profession. This would help them plan and monitor their development, training and performance effectively, and to set clear, relevant targets for improving their effectiveness. The standards would ensure that the focus at every point would be on improving the achievement of pupils and the quality of their education. It would also provide a basis for the professional recognition of teachers' expertise and achievements.
At a different level it would help providers of professional development to plan and provide high quality, relevant training which meets the needs of individual teachers.
What I am recommending here is therefore to start using standards as the cornerstone for teacher development and evaluation. Standards have been proved to be not only valuable in the context of formal certification (i.e. at the pre-service stage). They can inform varied professional development efforts even after graduation.
As I have argued elsewhere (see Bezzina, 2002) the link between the pre-service teacher education stage and the other stages has not been established. One can note that what is known as the induction phase (i.e. usually the first year or two after graduation) is non-existent in Malta and the continuing professional development (CPD) phase has serious limitations.
While current INSET provision that the education authorities organise may be beneficial, it is simply not good enough to help teachers and schools address the demands of the NMC. Mainly, it is still based on an old approach that sees professional development as delivering simple recipes to teachers working in isolation.
What is needed are new approaches that connect teachers to one another through in-school teams and departments and through cross-school professional communities that tackle problems of practice over time. This is where the concept of clustering can be addressed. It is in this respect that beacon schools in England are proving extremely effective and successful.
These approaches offer a connection to teachers' work with their students, a link to the concrete tasks of teaching, a focus on problem solving, a research base, and continuation over time through sustained conversations and coaching.
Schools, school clusters, the Education Division, the National Curriculum Council and the Faculty of Education need to develop new sources of professional development through school-faculty partnerships, professional development schools and networks.
CPD can be incorporated into teachers' daily work through joint planning, research, curriculum and assessment work, study groups, and peer coaching (see Bezzina and Testa, 2003; The Times, September 12 , p.21, 2003).
This article argues and recommends that we need to create varied opportunities for professional growth and not remain firmly established on current INSET provision. We need courses that are directly related to school needs and classroom responsibilities. We need to run courses that help teachers not only deal with the pressing challenges they face in deepening their subject knowledge but also respond to student diversity and teaching more effectively.
I have been arguing for this for over 14 years! However, I have been told not to give up. I may have lost a lot of hair in the process but there is still time, if God so wishes.
Given my success rate in influencing policy makers, may I be so bold as to propose the following recommendations which could help future (immediate!) discourse between the various education partners, including the division, the NCC, the faculty, the Secretariat for Catholic Schools, and the MUT.
Let us start working together rather than in our own ivory towers as we have often tended to do, and still practice, today. This in itself is a challenge, often one that can ruin and postpone developments as we succumb to some of the "evils" that hinder small states - jealousy, selfishness and hypocrisy among others. Who hasn't experienced these at one stage or another? I have.
Yet, the values that are upheld here focus on what Blanchard and O'Connor (1997) describe as "to connect", to connect between each other thanks to the powerful and profound principles such as respect, service, empowerment, legacy and growth.
Given my beliefs and the urge to go on in spite of the forces that be, may I encourage the reader to reflect on the following four recommendations:
¤ Establish clear standards for teachers: Set up a national board for professional teaching standards which would recommend standards for teachers to reach. The board would have representatives from all stakeholders. Develop and enforce rigorous standards for teacher preparation, initial licensing and professional development.
¤ Review teacher preparation and link with professional development: Organise teacher education and professional development around standards for students and teachers. Create stable, high-quality sources of professional development. Introduce a one-to-two-year induction programme for newly qualified teachers. Create and fund mentoring initially for pre-service and beginning teachers along with evaluation of teaching skills.
¤ Encourage and reward teachers' work in schools: Develop a career continuum for teaching linked to assessments and compensation systems to reward knowledge and skill. Set goals and enact incentives for national board certification. Formally accredit teachers for school development work they are engaged in through links between schools and the Faculty of Education and other institutions.
¤ Organise schools so students and teachers can be successful: Flatten hierarchies and reallocate resources to send more money to schools. Invest more in teachers and technology. Create links between schools to share examples of good practice and thus affect each others performance.
If we pay attention to supporting knowledgeable and creative teachers who work in productive schools, Maltese education will truly be in for an exciting future.
Dr Bezzina coordinates the Office of Professional Practice, Department of Education Studies, Faculty of Education. He can be reached on email: christopher.bezzina@um.edu.mt