INTRODUCTION 5

the dilemma of listening to children while at the same time feeling the
urgency of moving them on so that targets can be reached and time-scales
(particularly with the literacy hour) adhered to. While some of the language
is based in research terminology (this is necessary to show the integrity and
rigour of the research process), there are also significant numbers of stories
about teachers with which teacher readers will no doubt empathize.
The research was grounded in what is usually termed a socio-
constructivist paradigm applied to teachers pedagogical development. In
effect, the research examined the thesis that, through review and reflection
on practice with a sophisticated partner and in the light of video evidence,
teachers might articulate their conceptualizations of interactive teaching and
refine their practice of it. The project adopted the framework of the Con-
cerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM) (see, for example, Hall et al. 1979),
which details a progressive series of statements of concern about an innov-
ation (in this case, interactive teaching) interlinked with a sequence of levels
of use of the innovation. Further explanation will be provided in later
chapters.
Reflecting on and about practice (Schn 1983, 1987; Day 1999a, b) has
challenged both teachers and researchers to reconsider their teaching practices
in some depth and has involved systematic inquiry into . . . practice . . . to
deepen ones understanding of it (Lucas 1991: 84). At the outset of the
research, researcherpractitioner collaboration was thought likely to be
particularly effective because of the complementary exchange of skills and
knowledge (Day 1999a). Schulz (1987: 482) agrees, suggesting that it is during
moments of co-reflection that we explore and extrapolate pedagogical under-
standing and that it is often through reflection that we retrospectively con-
struct the meaning of our work. Day (1999a: 153) further suggests that those
Copyright 2003. McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved.

leading change must ensure participants have intellectual, practical and

affective support: this was an embedded part of the process of the reflective
dialogues, intended to extend and deepen understanding. This is some-
thing available to all teachers, particularly through peer-evaluation of actual
teaching or through the use of video as in this project.
A specific feature of the project was teachers working in partnership with
experienced tutor-researchers. Some chapters in this book are written by these
tutor-researchers, who present their own and the teachers perspectives. We
asked the teachers to both deconstruct their practices and also to engage in
the process of reconstruction of the meanings of their practices as part of the
research. We will argue later that these are important aspects of teachers pro-
fessional understanding and development. The process of deconstruction
seeks to provide understanding and to make meaning from teachers actions.
According to LaBoskey (1993) and Zeichner (1994), professional reflection
requires a clearly defined focus and criteria for making judgements if under-
standing is to be achieved. Having an explicit focus on interactive teaching,

Moyles, Janet R., etc., Fred Paterson, and Veronica Esarte-Sarries. Interactive Teaching in the Primary School, edited by
Janet R. Moyles, et al., McGraw-Hill Education, 2003. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/palico/detail.action?docID=292119.
Created from palico on 2017-03-14 07:52:18.
 6 JANET MOYLES AND THE SPRINT TEAM

its meaning and use gave just this kind of clear springboard for discussion,
analysis and interpretation. Significantly, Bullough and Gitlin (1991) identi-
fied the need for practitioners to talk about practice to enhance understanding
of it, not just at a polite conversational level but within deeper, focused dis-
course, underpinned by mutual respect and characterized by a willingness to
tolerate differences in opinion and values. Teacher readers might consider for
a moment the opportunities they have for actually thinking and talking about
practice in depth: all too often action is associated with the rush to feel that
at least some targets have been met by the end of each day and week. Time
to reflect seems like a luxury and so it was to the teachers within the SPRINT
Project.

The research: qualitative and quantitative methods

The SPRINT research aimed to explore classroom practice based on teachers

frames of reference. This provided the research team with several challenges,
including how they might:

facilitate teacher development without promoting particular

theoretical or conceptual models of interactive teaching;
respond when teachers asked for information or theoretical perspec-
tives on interactive teaching;
ensure teachers benefited from the skills and experience of their
higher education research-partners, all of whom were experienced
education tutors, mentors, advisers or researchers.
Copyright 2003. McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved.

In addition, the SPRINT Project had several clear objectives, which

informed both data collection and its analysis and interpretation, including:

construct a typology of interactive teaching derived from practising

teachers definitions;
examine teachers concerns about interactive teaching in the
absence, at that time, of relevant training;
observe primary teachers implementation of interactive teaching
within the various components of the literacy hour and compare
these with pre-NLS classroom interaction;
compare primary teachers use of interactive teaching in the literacy
hour with that undertaken by them in other subject areas within the
curriculum;
evaluate the process of video-stimulated reflective dialogue as a
means to enhance teachers reflection on, and development of, their
interactive teaching practice.

Moyles, Janet R., etc., Fred Paterson, and Veronica Esarte-Sarries. Interactive Teaching in the Primary School, edited by
Janet R. Moyles, et al., McGraw-Hill Education, 2003. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/palico/detail.action?docID=292119.
Created from palico on 2017-03-14 07:52:18.