Teacher Learning and Continuous Professional Development

  • Fiona FaulknerEmail author
  • John Kenny
  • Coral Campbell
  • Cosette Crisan


This chapter discusses teacher learning and professional development of out-of-field teachers from the point of view of the literature. It examines what makes this kind of learning and development effective and explores the ideas surrounding the varying rationale for the introduction of such teacher learning and professional development opportunities. Classical approaches to professional development are discussed in addition to several emerging international models of professional development that are currently being employed in the Republic of Ireland, England and Australia for in-service out-of-field teachers of mathematics predominantly but also a range of other subject disciplines (in the case of South Korea). Details of the structure of each of the models of professional development for in-service teachers are outlined using a country case study approach. Comparisons are made between the techniques employed in each country to upskill out-of-field teachers in specific disciplines. This chapter also proposes an international framework for teacher learning and professional development for out-of-field teachers that encompasses the best aspects of each country’s approach.


Teacher learning Professional development Continuous In-service 


  1. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 8(2), 132–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Britzman, D. (1986). Cultural myths in the making of a teacher: Biography and social structure in teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, 56(4), 442–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Crisan, C., & Rodd, M. (2011). Teachers of mathematics to mathematics teachers. In Smith, C. (Ed.), Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 31(3), 29–34.Google Scholar
  5. Crisan, C. & Rodd, M. (2014a). Talking the talk…but walking the walk? How do non-specialist mathematics teachers come to see themselves as mathematics teachers? In Hobbs L., Törner, G. (Eds.) Taking an international perspective on out-of-field teaching, 1st TAS Collective Symposium, Porto, Portugal.Google Scholar
  6. Crisan, C. & Rodd, M. (2014b). Negotiating contribution to the teaching of secondary mathematics: On identity development of non-specialist mathematics teachers. In BERA (British Education Research Association), Institute of Education, University of London, London, 23rd–25th Sept 2014.Google Scholar
  7. Day, C. (1999). Developing teachers: The challenges of lifelong learning. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  8. Doecke, B., Parr, S., & North, S. (2008). National mapping of teacher professional learning project. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST).Google Scholar
  9. Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development Effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gordon, B. M. (1985). Teaching teachers: “Nation at risk” and the issue of knowledge in teacher education. The Urban Review, 17(1), 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hawley, W. & Valli, L. (1999). The essentials of professional development: A new consensus. In L. Darling-Hammond, & L. Sykes, G. (Eds.) Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 127–150). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  12. Hobbs, L. (2013). Teaching ‘out-of-field’ as a boundary-crossing event: Factors shaping teacher identity. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 271–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ingvarson, L., Meiers, M., & Beavis, A. (2005). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers’ knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(10). Scholar
  14. Khan, S., & Van Wynsberghe, R. (2008). Cultivating the under-mined: Cross-case analysis as knowledge mobilization. Qualitative Social Research, 9(1). Art 34.
  15. Knapp, M. S. (2003). Professional development as a policy pathway. In R. E. Floden (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (pp. 109–158). Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  16. Kriewaldt, J. (2008). Research into relationships between teacher professional learning and teaching standards: Reviewing the literature. Presented at AARE Conference.
  17. Luft, J. A., Dubois, S. L., Nixon, R. S., & Campbell, B. K. (2015). Supporting newly hired teachers of science: Attaining teacher professional standards. Studies in Science Education, 51(1), 1–48. Scholar
  18. Luke, A., & McArdle, F. (2009). A model for research-based state professional development policy. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 37(3), 231–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lyons, T., Cooksey, R., Panizzon, D., Parnell, A., & Pegg, J. (2006). The SiMERR national survey. Prepared for the Department of Education, Science and Training.
  20. Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B., & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons: International comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. Australian Council of Learned Academies, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  21. Mayer, D., & Lloyd, M. (2011). Professional learning: An introduction to the research literature. Canberra: Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.Google Scholar
  22. McConney, A, & Price, A. (2009). An assessment of the phenomenon of “Teaching-out-of-Field” in WA schools. Report prepared under contract to Western Australian College of Teaching.Google Scholar
  23. Meiers, M., & Ingvarson, L. (2005). Investigating the links between teacher professional development and student learning outcomes. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER).Google Scholar
  24. Ní Ríordáin, M., & Hannigan, A. (2009). Out-of-field teaching in post-primary mathematics education: an analysis of the Irish context. Research report. National Centre for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching and Learning.Google Scholar
  25. Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development (OECD). (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS (Teaching And Learning International Survey). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  26. Office of the Chief Scientist. (2014). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Australia’s future. Australian Government, Canberra.
  27. OfSted (2006). Evaluating mathematics provision for 14–19-year-olds. London: Ofsted.Google Scholar
  28. Price, A., & Hobbs L. (2014). TAS in Australia: Out-of-field teaching a common practice. In L. Hobbs & G. Törner (Eds.), Taking on International Perspective on “Out-of-Field” Teaching: Proceedings and Agenda for Research and Action from the 1st Teaching Across Specialisations (TAS) Collective Symposium (pp. 10–13). TAS Collective.
  29. Rodd, M., & Crisan, C. (2015). In-service training to become a mathematics specialist: Aspiration and resistance, education and transition. In European Conference on Educational Research (ECER), Education and Transition.Google Scholar
  30. Timperley, H. (2008). Teacher professional learning and development. Brussels: International Academy of Education (IAE).Google Scholar
  31. Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  32. Trinity College Dublin. (2016). Undergraduate studies: Academic Credit System (ECTS).
  33. Weldon, P. R. (2016). Out-of-field teaching in Australian secondary schools. Policy Insights #6. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER).Google Scholar
  34. Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education, 24, 173–210.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiona Faulkner
    • 1
    Email author
  • John Kenny
    • 2
  • Coral Campbell
    • 3
  • Cosette Crisan
    • 4
  1. 1.Dublin Institute of TechnologyDublinIreland
  2. 2.University of TasmaniaLauncestonAustralia
  3. 3.Deakin UniversityGeelongAustralia
  4. 4.UCL Institute of EducationLondonEngland

Personalised recommendations