Research in Brief - February 2007 - Volume 107 (2)

Literature Review as an Invitation to Inquiry: Beginning Research on Teacher Professional Continuum

Carol L. Stuessy and PRISE Research Group
Texas A&M University

Teacher Professional Continuum (TPC) brings to mind a messy collection of terms: induction, intern, mentoring, mid-career, renewal, preparation, professional development, recruitment, retention, veteran teachers. While each has been a topic for previous research, as a set these terms often share blurred meanings within the research literature. Currently, no coherent structure or model defines, differentiates, or identifies the most important concepts, processes, and relationships existing between and among the concepts and processes residing within the TPC conceptual frame. The need for such a framework became apparent in the earliest stages of the PRISE Research Group's thinking about methods, instrumentation, interview questions, case studies, and other aspects of the research associated with the TPC of high school science teachers in Texas. The PRISE Research Group needed a conceptual framework as a “foundation and inspiration” (Boote & Beile, 2005) to ground the pursuit of the PRISE project's substantial research goals: to define what is, to describe what should be, and to provide a list of policy alternatives regarding how to get there in recruiting, renewing, and retaining high school science teachers in the state of Texas.

Review of the literature has served many purposes, including the demarcation of what is and what is not within the scope of the projected research goals. Criteria outlined by Boote and Beile (2005) for evaluating the quality of dissertation literature reviews have been applied in the group's literature review process. As the work has progressed, the purpose of the ill-defined problem of literature review has become more focused: to develop a conceptual model derived from the review that articulates important variables and phenomena relevant to the recruitment, renewal, and retention of high school science teachers at various stages in their career development. We report our process here, which has occurred iteratively and recursively in four stages: Immersion, Domain Definition, Synthesis and Communication, and Model Revision.

Immersion. We began explorations of the high school science teacher professional continuum (TPC) by reading the entire May 2005 issue of Educational Leadership entitled, Supporting New Educators. The readability, practicality, and references to previous research made this journal particularly appropriate as a starting point to the literature review process. Through continuous reading and web posting, Scholars became immersed in the world of educational research. Relevant variables, phenomena, and their relationships emerged to build a “web” of ideas relevant in developing the conceptual framework to ground our studies of the high school science teacher professional continuum in Texas. Concept mapping was a general learning strategy used to analyze research articles. Following the conventions established by Novak and Gowin (1987), concept mapping allowed us to identify important concepts and communicate their relationships. Within the immersion process, research articles identified from the original Educational Leadership articles led to an expansion of the group's focus from induction to other stages in the teacher professional continuum. Patterns emerged between and among stages in the TPC, now identified as Induction-Year, Mid-Career, and Veteran Teachers, and practices of Teachers and Schools. Throughout the Immersion Phase, ideas coalesced through a process of reading, sharing, discussion, reflection, and revision.

Domain Definition. In this phase, we chose particular areas of interest for more intensive literature review. These areas were defined as Practice Domains. A matrix was developed and refined to guide our work, and to situate readings within the broader context of the project. Practice Domains were separated for Teachers and Schools. The separation was particularly significant at this stage because the Research Group associated Practice Domains with either Teachers or Schools, but not both. Also during this stage, names for the domains, such as Relationships within School Walls and Supports Outside School Walls, were modified as we continued to read and revise our thinking about the frame of concepts and relationships within their particular domain. Concept mapping was still used to define concepts and relationships within and across research articles. Articles with information relevant to more than one domain were shared electronically and discussed in face-to-face meetings. Throughout this process, individual scholars became “experts” in their own domains, while the Research Group as a whole developed more depth in their understanding of entire high school science TPC.

Synthesis and Communication. Posters and white papers were chosen to introduce aspects of the conceptual framework to professional audiences outside the PRISE research community. The more focused posters enabled Scholars to tighten the writing of their white papers; and rich text from white papers allowed Scholars to better represent each of the domains in summary form of the posters. Templates were used to format posters and white papers about each of the Practice Domains. (See the PRISE website for copies of both posters and white papers, http://prise.tamu.edu.) In the fall of 2006, posters were shared with state, regional, and national communities of scholars in the fields of teacher preparation and science education at meetings of CREATE, Southwest-Association for Science Teacher Educators and the School Science Mathematics Association. Weekly meetings during this phase turned to serious discussions about the conceptual model of the project. The matrix gave way to a Venn diagram, which represented the shift in the Research Group's conceptualization of the high school science TPC. Practice Domains, while still “belonging” to either Teachers or Schools, came together in ideal situations to develop and support practices, programs, and policies contributing to the recruitment, renewal, and retention of high school science teachers. Another noteworthy addition in this model was the background of School Community, in which Teachers, School and Domains all were embedded. With the more holistic conceptualization of the TPC, PRISE Scholars continued to revise their white papers to reflect this new understanding of the importance of shared responsibility and community, which embed the domains of practices influencing the recruitment, renewal, and retention of high school science teachers.

Model Refinement. A final review of white paper drafts led to further refinement of the working model, replacing the Venn diagram with a concept map that situates and sequences players, domains, local outcomes, and long-range goals. In this model, successful Recruitment, Induction, Renewal, and Job Satisfaction, are defined as Local Outcomes, which then contribute to Teacher Retention. Job Satisfaction was added as an outcome to reflect its importance as a precursor in Teacher Retention, primarily as a result of reading new work force literature. The Practice Domain of Teacher Commitment to Professional Development was elevated in importance - it was removed from its status as a Practice Domain to become a more inclusive concept, Committed Teachers. The group chose the term, Supportive Administrators, to personalize the category representing the other set of players contributing to the high school science TPC. The refined conceptual model also indicates that Committed Teachers and Supportive Administrators work through Domains of Practice to contribute to successful school-level outcomes. Job Satisfaction remains a variable to be explored in our research, at this point thought to be very important in our investigations regarding the retention of high school science teachers. The current working model for the PRISE Project represents our understanding of “where the literature says high schools should be” in working towards the goal of retention. This model hypothesizes the actors, practices, and local outcomes predicting successful retention of high school science teachers in Texas.

Conclusion

Results of our research will be used to test the model with case study data collected from 50 schools randomly chosen to represent the 1,361 high schools in Texas, from cases studies of exemplary schools and high school science teachers who have been successful in their retention efforts, and from dialog research data from approximately 30 stakeholders in high school science who will model policy alternatives for high schools in Texas to recruit, induct, renew, and retain high school science teachers. Throughout the research phases of our project, the conceptual model will guide our research to answer the three general policy questions of “Where are we?” “Where do we want to be?” and “How do we get there?” We expect that the processes and products of each phase will inform the model, suggesting refinements and revisions. The phases of Immersion, Domain Definition, Synthesis/Communication, and Model Revision have been iterative, with activities within each phase informing the final development of the working conceptual model. This model results from individuals within the PRISE Research Group committed to their domains of literature review, responsive to others as they have experienced their own stages of dissonance and growth in understanding, and willingness to tolerate the ambiguity of the necessary, continuous cycles of reflection and revision associated with the process.

References

Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34, 3-15.

Novak, J. D., & Gowin, B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.