Advertisement

Providers: Offerings and Critiques

  • Yongjian LiEmail author
  • Fred Dervin
Chapter
  • 346 Downloads

Abstract

In this chapter examines the work of CPD providers. The following questions are answered: who organises CPD in Finland? What do they offer? What problems do they face in offering CPD? Main Finnish providers share their views, critiques and hopes about CPD. Tensions from within and between providers are also described. The chapter helps get a broad sense of CPD offerings and strategies.

References

  1. Aspfors, J. (2012). Induction practices: Experiences of newly qualified teachers. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Darling-Hammond, L. (2009). Recognizing and enhancing teacher effectiveness. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 3, 1–24.Google Scholar
  3. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching.Google Scholar
  4. Girvan, C., Conneely, C., & Tangney, B. (2016). Extending experiential learning in teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 58, 129–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hämäläinen, K., & Hämäläinen, K. (2011). Professional development for education personnel as a competence resource. A report on good practices and development measures in professional development for education personnel. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.Google Scholar
  6. Hämäläinen, K., Hämäläinen, K., & Kangasniemi, J. (2015). Osaamisen kehittämisen poluille: Valtion rahoittaman opetustoimen henkilöstökoulutuksen haasteet ja tulevaisuus [Knowledge development direction: A state funded education in-service training, challenges and future]. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.Google Scholar
  7. Heikkinen, H., Hästö, P., Kangas, V., & Leinonen, M. (2015). Promoting exploratory teaching in mathematics: A design experiment on a CPD course for teachers. LUMAT (2013–2015 Issues), 3(6), 905–924.Google Scholar
  8. Huber, S. G. (2012). The impact of professional development: A theoretical model for empirical research, evaluation, planning and conducting training and development programmes. Professional Development in Education, 37(5), 837–853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. National Board of Education (2016). National core curriculum for basic education. Helsinki: Opetushallitus.Google Scholar
  10. Niemi, H. (2015). Teacher professional development in Finland: Towards a more holistic approach. Psychology, Society & Education, 7(3), 279–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pöntynen, L., & Silander, T. (2015). Opettajat koulutuksessa - nappikaupasta rohkeisiin ratkaisuihin [Teachers in training—The most daring solutions]. Available at https://www.sitra.fi/blogit/opettajat-koulutuksessa-nappikaupasta-rohkeisiin-ratkaisuihin/.
  12. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., & Silver, E. (1999). The development of professional developers: Learning to assist teachers in new settings in new ways. Harvard Educational Review, 69(3), 237–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Department of Teacher EducationUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations