The effectiveness of community of practice in

Advances in Early Education And Day Care Emerald Book Chapter: Chapter 8 The Effectiveness of Community of Practice in Supporting Israeli Kindergarten Teachers Dealing With an Emotionally Laden Topic David Brody, Avigail Friedman

ng

Article information:

is

hi

To cite this document: David Brody, Avigail Friedman, (2012),"Chapter 8 The Effectiveness of Community of Practice in Supporting Israeli Kindergarten Teachers Dealing With an Emotionally Laden Topic", John A. Sutterby, in (ed.) Early Education in a Global Context (Advances in Early Education And Day Care, Volume 16), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 183 - 210

Pu

bl

Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S0270-4021(2012)0000016011 Downloaded on: 31-10-2012

up

References: This document contains references to 26 other documents

(c

)E

m

er

al

d

G

ro

To copy this document: [email protected]

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by Emerald Group Publishing Limited For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.

CHAPTER 8

Pu

bl

is h

in g

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE IN SUPPORTING ISRAELI KINDERGARTEN TEACHERS DEALING WITH AN EMOTIONALLY LADEN TOPIC

ro u

p

David Brody and Avigail Friedman

d

G

ABSTRACT

(c )

Em

er

al

Kindergarten teachers are increasingly being called on to deal with emotionally laden topics in their classrooms. Little is known about effective means of supporting early childhood educators in their professional development to cope with these issues effectively. This study examines the utility of the Community of Practice (COP) model to address this need. A two-year COP was established among veteran and novice Israeli kindergarten teachers focused on teaching the Holocaust in their classrooms, which is a culturally mandated topic in preschools and kindergartens in their country. Six teachers were interviewed, and the data was analyzed using grounded theory. Findings show the COP to support teachers in learning more about the subject matter and thinking deeply about its teaching in the early childhood classroom. In addition the COP Early Education in a Global Context Advances in Early Education and Day Care, Volume 16, 183–210 Copyright r 2012 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 0270-4021/doi:10.1108/S0270-4021(2012)0000016011

183

184

DAVID BRODY AND AVIGAIL FRIEDMAN

provided a community of peers that encouraged meaningful feedback in a safe environment, which served to break professional isolation. The COP format was also found to be an effective tool for professional growth due to its support of cooperative learning, professional assurance, empowerment, mindfulness, and a disposition for focusing on the child’s needs rather than the demands of the curriculum. Keywords: Community of practice; Holocaust; emotionally laden topic; professional development; isolation

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Israeli early childhood educators must yearly negotiate meaning for their pupils related to national memories of tragic proportions. While many of these cultural narratives are ‘‘historic’’ in the sense of creating emotional and cognitive distance, others are palpably present in the day-to-day lives of the children in the classroom. Large portions of the national early childhood curriculum focus on the cycle of Jewish holidays, many of which commemorate victories in the face of mass destruction and killings (Golden, 2005). Bible stories which include murderous attacks on the Jewish people, such as Pharaoh’s order to cast all baby boys into the Nile River, take their place alongside more benign tales such as the love story of Rachel and Jacob at the well. These national canons of atrocities are typically presented as fact and used to create background material for later catharsis and victory. In contrast, the Nazi attempt to annihilate world Jewry in the last century, termed the Holocaust, is current and still touches the lives of many Israelis whose relatives perished in the debacle. Early childhood educators face the same question every year of how to deal with the Holocaust narrative as it comes to the fore on Holocaust Remembrance Day.

HOLOCAUST IN THE ISRAEL EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOM Holocaust commemoration has penetrated the national ethos in such proportions that teachers of young children have little choice but to include Holocaust Remembrance Day into the regular program (Ben-Amos & BetEl, 1999). State education inspectors, parents, and the society in general expect teachers to mark the day as a national event. The preschool division of the Ministry of Education, which deals with ages 3–7 before school entry, has formulated clear goals which include teachers relating to the events

Effectiveness of COP in Supporting Israeli Kindergarten Teachers

185

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

of the day according to their own judgment. The ministry disseminates teaching materials and provides in-service programs. On the ministry website, the psychologist Ora Goldhirsh (2008) proposes an active role for the teacher. The events of Holocaust Remembrance Day are widely felt by all Israelis. The day itself is marked by a 2-minute siren during which citizens stand silently. Children’s exposure to Holocaust remembrance events results in the teachers feeling a need to respond. Brody (2009) found that Israeli early childhood teachers feel obligated to find socially acceptable Holocaust pedagogies for their classrooms. Though quantitative data are unavailable, Rina Cohen Rozenshein, the Ministry of Education’s National Supervisor for Curriculum and Instruction in Early Childhood, is satisfied that ‘‘in most early childhood classrooms, Holocaust Day is marked. In a minority of classes the teachers go into greater depth.’’1 This pressure to relate to the Holocaust takes place within an environment of extreme teacher isolation, which has been found to be related to three factors. The first cause relates to the physical structure of Israeli kindergartens and preschools which predicates social and emotional isolation among the teachers because the classrooms are scattered throughout the neighborhoods in detached buildings (Eizenberg, 2005; Ganz-Aloni, 2003; Unger, 2003). The second factor is the gap between the teachers’ expectations of themselves and the expectations of support personnel. The teachers lack emotional support for their work, claiming that they have no one to address their emotional needs related to their work (Admati, 2000). In spite of these dictates from above, the teachers in fact must take responsibility for their own pedagogic decisions. Such responsibility is enacted in isolation from other professionals (Ganz-Aloni, 2003). The third factor contributing to a sense of teacher isolation relates to the teachers functioning with very little supervision, which is characterized by its functional nature and its lack of alignment with the needs of the teachers (Ganz-Aloni, 2003). Teacher isolation thus serves to heighten the need for adequate support from the early childhood supervisors for coping with Holocaust Remembrance Day in the classroom (Brody, 2009). Furthermore, the child centered and developmentally sensitive training of Israeli early childhood teachers contradicts this cultural mandate that they bring into their classroom a topic which should at face value be postponed to a later age when children are more capable of understanding and digesting the material (Brody & Cohen, in press). The ethic of caring is widely recognized as a critical feature of the early childhood profession (Taggart, 2011). Particularly in the realm of emotionally laden topics, such as the case of Holocaust education in Israel, the issue of providing emotional support for young children comes to the

186


in g

fore. In order for early childhood teachers to adequately support children when confronting topics which require sensitivity and emotional knowledge, the teachers themselves need to be emotionally equipped to deal with such situations (Swartz & McElwain, 2012). Furthermore, encouraging professional responsibility as teachers negotiate between a developmentally inappropriate cultural mandate and the emotional needs of the child challenges professional developers to find effective frameworks for helping teachers face this dilemma (Lauermann & Karabenick, 2011). These practical and theoretical considerations shaped our professional development project regarding Holocaust education in the Israeli early childhood classroom.

is h

THE COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE AS A SOLUTION

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

In response to an acute need among the early childhood teachers for adequate guidance in dealing with this dilemma, the early childhood faculty of Efrata College of Education in Jerusalem established a pilot program based on Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder’s (2002) Community of Practice (COP) model. This paradigm of professional development and organizational problem solving assumes that practitioners who share common issues related to their profession benefit from close and sustained interaction focused on a particular and highly salient topic. Thus the COP becomes a forum in which isolation transforms into collegial support and mutual crossfertilization of ideas reaching toward new solutions. According to Wenger (1998) COPs can be found in society wherever people interact to negotiate meaning out of their experiences, and the venues include the workplace, educational institutions, and even families. These communities are identified by a domain or joint enterprise, by community defined by mutual engagement, and practice of shared repertoire. As explained by Wenger et al. (2002), three features characterize the COP: domain, community, and practice. Domain refers to the common enterprise or topic which is the focus of the group, community relates to the interpersonal interchanges and sense of belonging to a group, and practice specifies the common knowledge, rules, and engagement of the members of the group connected to their profession. In their unattended state, the COP has been found to enable its members to not only survive, but also to find meaning in their daily professional and personal engagements. On the other hand, COPs may be established, cultivated, and nurtured (Wenger et al., 2002) as a way of encouraging active participation in creating solutions to those issues in which the participants engage.


187

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Initiators of professional development in educational settings have found broad use of the COP model particularly in situations where diverse viewpoints are recognized and valued. Frost, Akmal, and Kingrey (2010) used the COP model in an interorganizational curriculum development group to promote cooperation between divergent groups. The ‘‘critical friends group’’ is a professional development paradigm based on community building among teachers. However this model’s rigid protocol was found to interfere with progress on commonly shared matters of practice (Curry, 2008). A more open adaptation of the COP was researched by Poyas and Smith (2007), who used the model to support the forging of a professional identity among novice clinical faculty teacher educators. A study of professional development among experienced teachers showed that participation in a COP led to change in participants’ beliefs as well as practices in the implementation of a new curriculum (Baildon & Damico, 2008). In all of these studies, the social nature of professional learning emerges as a critical factor. Following this understanding of the importance of social interaction as a basis for professional development, we decided to enlist the COP model as a tool with potential for supporting early childhood educators in their individual struggle with the pedagogy of the Holocaust. The highly emotional content of this material combined with the extreme isolation of the Israeli teachers called for a solution which would not only address the problematic content, but would also provide an opportunity for negotiating meaning within a professional community. We initiated our COP by inviting a small group of college graduates who were currently teaching preschool and kindergarten in the Jerusalem area to participate in a yearlong forum focused on the pedagogy of the Holocaust for young children. Teacher responses ranged from rejection to mild curiosity and enthusiasm. We formed a group of six teachers who consistently attended monthly meetings throughout the first year and then requested to continue a second year focusing and deepening their engagement with Holocaust education. We opened our first meeting with the question of the appropriateness of teaching about the Holocaust to young children, a query which is rarely raised among Israeli early childhood educators. By openly listening and responding to various opinions around the table, we communicated to our participants that our purpose was to form a supportive community, a safe place for teachers to explore their views, and seek solutions to the dilemma shared by all. As the year progressed, the meetings of the COP became venues for heated and respectful discussions. Teachers shared their practice, and entertained new

188


(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

ideas and conceptual frameworks. By encouraging each participant to find her own voice in the pedagogical discourse, we supported unique solutions suited not only to the particular population and age group, but also to each teacher’s personal connection to and feelings about the Holocaust. Some teachers found new ways to use existing teaching materials while others abandoned these materials altogether, as they began to generate their own stories. They brought these materials to the group, welcoming their colleagues’ feedback, and they often made revisions based on the communal discourse. As Holocaust Remembrance Day approached, teachers refined their plans and implemented them on the day itself. This was followed by serious sharing with the other members of the group what they had done in their classroom on the day of commemoration. Toward the end of the first year, the teachers decided to write a book for other early childhood educators in order to share their varied approaches with a broader audience. During the second year, writing the book became a focus of the COP. Participants chose a common format for their chapters, and each presented her work for group critique. At the time of this writing, the book is in its final stages of completion in preparing for submitting to a publisher. The aim of this study is to understand the efficacy of the COP for these teachers, as they desire to learn how to cope with the seemingly impossible dilemma of dealing with Holocaust in an early childhood classroom in a developmentally appropriate manner. We focused on three research questions: What characterized the COP as a method of professional development for early childhood educators? How did the COP contribute to the teachers’ learning about how to deal with the Holocaust? How did the COP contribute to the teachers’ own professional development as early childhood educators?

METHODS This qualitative research relied on several methods of data collection including semi-structured interviews, documentation of the meetings, and artifacts such as teaching materials produced by members of the community and children’s comments and drawings in response to the activities. The interviews took place at the conclusion of the second year of the project, and were conducted by a researcher who had not participated in the COP meetings. The interviews were divided into three parts, each based on one of the three research questions. The interviews were recorded,


189

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

transcribed, and later analyzed using narrative methodology (Josselson, Lieblich, & McAdams, 2002; Rubin & Rubin, 2005). The two researchers, both lecturers at the college, had previous acquaintance with the early childhood educators as their former pedagogic instructor at the college and as a college supervisor of students placed in these classrooms. Our position regarding the project itself is one of personal professional involvement, while at the same time maintaining a scholarly distance from the various data sources in order to gain analytic perspective. For example, the researcher who was not directly involved in the COP conducted the interviews, presuming that this distance would enable the teachers to reflect more openly about their experiences. Triangulation was achieved by comparing artifacts such as teaching materials produced by these teachers with their formulations and understandings expressed in their interviews. Grounded theory was used for analyzing the data by an open coding system. Each researcher independently analyzed the data, identifying themes related to each of the three research questions (Strauss & Corbin, 2008). The two researchers compared their analyses in order to refine the coding. Where agreement was not found, the researchers discussed the points of disagreement and reached consensus regarding a redefinition of the categories in order to achieve alignment about the themes and the specific coding between the two researchers. Once the coding was completed, we realized that the categories we had identified were suitable to the major elements of the COP model as described by Wenger et al. (2002, pp. 29–40) including domain, community, and practice. We therefore adapted these three categories as an umbrella rubric. Within these three categories, we then generated subtopics to further clarify the themes. The study included interviews with all six teachers who participated in the COP. Permission for this study was granted by the college’s Internal Review Board. The teachers who were interviewed agree to the process voluntarily. We guaranteed their anonymity by using pseudonyms in the writing of this paper, and hiding any features of their work which might reveal their identity.

FINDINGS The findings will be presented according to the three major features of COP: domain, community, and practice. While these broad categories serve as an organizing principle for the results, the teachers’ relationship to each of them is refined by further examination of the respondents’ explanations.

190


We will conclude the findings section with an explanation of how the findings on each of the three major components, domain, community, and practice address our research questions.

Domain

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

The subject matter of the COP is considered to be an essential component because it provides a focus and generates interest and investment among the members. Our COP focused on the Holocaust was an outgrowth of a college supported ongoing support group for the professional development of selected kindergarten and preschool teachers. At the end of each year, the faculty member who worked with the group consulted with the teachers to select a topic for the coming year. The selection of the Holocaust topic by the group was seen by many as a significant factor in their motivation to delve deeply into the subject, and they stated their appreciation of the connection of the topic to their own practice. The teachers noted that the total agreement among the participants about this topic added to its importance. The focus on one topic for the year provided a goal orientation which was viewed positively.

(c )

Em

er

al

The Holocaust as Domain When relating to the domain of Holocaust education itself, the teachers described the topic in emotional terms such as ‘‘frightening, complex, and difficult to teach.’’ Limor explained this complexity by noting its proximity in time and her acquaintance with ‘‘people who were there.’’ Continuing this theme, Anat added that there is no happy ending, nothing to ‘‘soften’’ the topic, which sets it apart from difficult and complex bible stories which are included in the curriculum. Nurit calls the Holocaust a ‘‘difficult story’’ which, unlike the complex bible stories which can be simplified, has few such pedagogic solutions. Anat added that the Holocaust is generally ‘‘not touched nor dealt with,’’ and not thought about critically on a professional level. Others noted that their preservice training for teaching the Holocaust was inadequate because ‘‘until you have the responsibility to teach it, you can’t appreciate its complexity.’’ Anat noted that her own dissatisfaction with how she had taught the topic in the past actually motivated her participation in the forum to seek more appropriate approaches. It was clear from these comments that the control given to the teachers in choosing the topic themselves was a major factor in the effectiveness of this domain for the group.


191

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Thinking About the Domain Another feature of the domain for the COP was the teachers’ actually thinking about the Holocaust. Many of the teachers in the group had not thought deeply about the Holocaust as subject matter which had to be taught. For Keren, the forum supported her thinking about the Holocaust on a theoretical rather than practical level, and she valued this opportunity to consider it on a higher plain than she was accustomed to. Limor came to the group with complete confidence in her current Holocaust teaching; even so she claims that the forum exposed her to the pedagogic thinking of other teachers about the topic. This exposure opened for her a consideration of other directions which she had not previously thought about. She added: ‘‘It is very very important for me to know what other people think about the Holocaust.’’ The stimulation of the teachers’ thinking took two forms: one deductive and one constructively emanating from cognitive dissonance. Keren described the deductive logic in the following quote:

al

d

G

ro u

p

The process (of thinking) was structured. It went from one thing to another until you reach the essence of the topic, to go from general and step by step to reduce it until you reach the point which you want to examine its truthfulness. We’ll check if it’s any good or not y what are the goals of the topic we have chosen, to check its appropriateness for the children.

(c )

Em

er

Creation of dissonance with current understandings provided a second stimulus to thinking. This dissonance resulted from disturbing questions which were raised and discussed. For example, the group examined the appropriateness of dealing with the Holocaust at all in the early childhood classroom, a question which teachers had not previously dared to ask. This discussion stimulated new thinking for Limor, who stated: ‘‘This awakened in me thoughts, and to a certain extent it shocked me. It wasn’t easy for me to hear y . It really aroused within me an internal dialogue.’’ Nurit’s own emotionally laden relationship to the Holocaust included deep feelings, fears, and concerns which had blocked her being able to relate to the topic on a cognitive level. Venting her personal feelings in the COP enabled her to think clearly about the Holocaust itself and how young children might relate to it. In addition she stated that the forum promoted her own ‘‘thinking about thinking,’’ and this process of metacognition was particularly significant to her. As the forum made the familiar strange, she was able to relate to the topic in a thoughtful manner. As a veteran teacher of 20 years, Nurit was renewed by this newfound ability to think about the topic.

192


bl

Community

is h

in g

Tova describes a different process of thinking which the COP encouraged. She claims that before her involvement in the forum, she had collected ideas from friends who were teaching the topic. Her thoughts were ‘‘disorganized’’ and she was dissatisfied with the results. Through the forum, she gained insights as she learned to think independently, ‘‘to be a person who thinks for herself.’’ For all of the teachers, the domain was not teaching the Holocaust, rather it focused on their thinking about how to teach the topic. This newfound experience of thinking deeply about a subject which was described as difficult and complex was a major feature of the COP as expressed in the interviews.

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

The concept of community includes not only the social structure of people being together, but also their interactions. In a COP, the community infers that ‘‘members interact regularly on issues important to their domain’’ (Wenger et al., 2002, p. 34). In our findings, the teachers stressed both the structure of the COP and the important activities they engaged in, and together these elements described the community for them.

(c )

Em

er

Structure: Composition, Size, and Organization The teachers regarded the structure of the COP as critical to its utility for their professional development. They spoke about three aspects of the structure: the composition, size, and organization of the meetings. The participants valued the others who joined the COP, both teachers and group leaders. They noted that participants and leaders came from the field and from academia and this combination raised the level from the usual gathering of teachers. The participants agreed that the forum should be expanded from its current size of 6 to 10 or more participants in order to provide a broader range of perspective, which they deeply valued. The organization of the COP was meaningful for many of the teachers, and the role of the leader was dominant for the forum. Anat saw this role as bringing new ideas to the meetings and stimulating discussion. Nurit added the importance of asking the right questions, inviting expression of a range of opinions, and creating a nonjudgmental atmosphere. In addition, she appreciated the leader’s responding and giving appropriate feedback to the various opinions. Another aspect of the group structure was the sense of equal status between the teachers themselves. Both veteran and novice


193

teachers took part in COP, but these differences were not felt in the discussions and did not influence the group dynamics. Ziva noted the absence of competition between the teachers, and Nurit spoke about the focused nature of the meetings which were goal oriented and therefore ‘‘not a waste of time.’’ These structural aspects of the COP were seen by the teachers as motivational factors which caused them to participate in spite of their many professional and family commitments.

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Learning Processes The professional growth and learning of the participants consisted of many components of the COP: a safe and nonjudgmental environment, breaking isolation, discussion and discourse, peer learning/cooperation and sharing, and professional assurance. Each of these components will be examined separately with evidence from the interviews.

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Safe and Nonjudgmental Environment. The COP enabled the teachers to speak their own truths without fear of criticism or condemnation. This atmosphere of safety and acceptance enabled genuine discourse. Karen provided an example of this openness by telling about a colleague who decided not to relate to the Holocaust in her class. Although others disagreed with this approach for their own practice, they legitimated this possibility without negative judgment. Tova noted that the forum was a place to speak about their failures as well as successes, a rare occurrence among early childhood educators. She stated:

(c )

Often we try to hide our failures. In the forum people spoke freely. In my first year of teaching, I was embarrassed that I copied ideas from here and there. I didn’t tell this to my friends and even to my husband I didn’t talk about it.

Limor added that the honest discourse in the forum was made possible by the absence of an authority whom the teachers had to satisfy or impress. Nor was there anyone to impose a particular approach. Many teachers noted the nonjudgmental atmosphere of the COP in which all views were accepted. Anat explained this feeling by stating that in the forum there was no right and wrong. She added: ‘‘There was openness to accept what I do, or I did in the past. I feel good, and I’m still able to accept criticism, and I’m not afraid of what they will say about me.’’ Respect for differences of opinion was emphasized by Ziva, who stated: ‘‘Each one brings to the forum their own experience from a different place.’’ Revealing emotions to colleagues was mentioned as a positive feature of the COP. Nurit had built up a residual backlog of feelings about the Holocaust over the years. She

194


found the forum to be a safe and protected place to vent these deep emotions, which added to her motivation to participate.

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Breaking Isolation. The acute isolation of Israeli early childhood educators results from the physical separation of the classroom and their lack of daily interaction with colleagues. Every teacher in the COP stressed her isolation in dealing with the Holocaust and the role of the forum in breaking this isolation. Their descriptions of their work clarify the extent to which this isolation creates difficulties in their teaching of the Holocaust. Limor complained about the absence of feedback about her teaching as well as the fact that she has ‘‘no one to guide (her).’’ Ziva echoed this thought as she remarked that her pedagogic decisions are made alone. Limor also noted that in her preservice training, she was not told what to teach and not to teach about the Holocaust, nor what is age appropriate. Anat added to this sense of loneliness by commenting that she has no one to speak with except the classroom aide. These various descriptions of isolation highlight the teachers’ explanations of exactly how the COP solved this problem. Karen said that she would eagerly continue her participation in the COP because it provides a community in which she can share her thoughts with colleagues. For Anat the COP engenders a good feeling about ‘‘being part of something, creating a connection between teachers, and giving a sense of belonging.’’ When she hears others talk about their difficulties with the Holocaust and she talks about her own difficulties she gains the feeling ‘‘that (she) is not alone.’’ Nurit compares the COP with other professional development courses, noting that she has very few opportunities to engage in cooperative peer learning, and she adds ‘‘I am thirsty for this.’’ Tova made a similar comparison, and concluded that most meetings organized by her supervisors consist of lectures, claiming that teachers ‘‘need an opportunity for talking about teaching.’’ She continued by explaining that through the COP she made a radical decision to not teach the Holocaust in her preschool class. Although other teachers in the COP disagreed with this approach, they actually supported Tova in her unpopular decision. This support gave her backing and a sense of belonging as she concluded ‘‘I felt like I’m not alone in the classroom.’’ All of the teachers in the COP experienced isolation as a routine part of their professional lives, and they each expressed in their own manner how the COP served to break this isolation which was a barrier to finding an adequate solution for teaching about the Holocaust.


195

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Discussion and Discourse. The COP was seen by the teachers as a venue for discussion and discourse. As noted above, opportunities for such engagement were rare in their professional development experience. The COP stood in sharp contrast to other meetings and courses which they were required to attend. Anat valued the community as an opportunity to raise issues which were important to her. Tova found the sharing of ideas to be ‘‘riveting’’ and characterized by mutual listening in a nonjudgmental atmosphere. These discussions enabled Ziva to better understand the Holocaust itself and to think about pedagogic issues about which she was previously unaware. In addition to the collegial exchange of ideas through group discussions there were also structured activities involving thinking routines. Karen found these thinking exercises to be intellectually challenging and helpful in triggering discussions. Anat noted that other teachers’ feedback about her own work enabled her to move forward. It was important to her ‘‘to see what I do from the perspective of others, how it looks in their eyes, and what they think about it.’’ Ziva endorsed this particular benefit by stating that the feedback was a positive contribution which advanced her. Tova’s assessment of the discussions explains how they helped her become an independent thinker:

er

al

d

In the forum, the teachers did not ask each other what they did in the classroom, ‘‘copy/ paste,’’ rather they spoke about their approaches and brought them to the surface. I thought on my own, and not because they told me to think in a certain way.

(c )

Em

The composite feature of these comments about discussion and discourse in the COP stresses their critical role in helping teachers change their thinking about their practice. Peer Learning/Cooperation and Sharing. The COP promoted teacher learning based on peer interaction, cooperation, and sharing. Hearing her colleagues’ viewpoints was inherently interesting to Karen, who appreciated the focus not only on teaching experiences but also on teacher thinking. Nurit added that the reactions of teachers to this thinking encouraged her to suggest alternatives and examine their advantages and disadvantages. Ziva explained that the COP moved forward her own thinking, and sharpened her professional identity as she consulted with colleagues by sharing her own experiences and ideas. This aspect of receiving feedback was complemented by the contributions of each participant to the thinking of the others. For the teachers in the COP, peer learning means contributing from your thoughts and experience, and learning from the contributions of others. Ziva explained: ‘‘You do it for yourself and for others, it’s a two way

196


ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

street.’’ The significance for peer learning for the teachers found expression in their need to connect beyond the confines of time and space in the forum. Tova commented: ‘‘We are all busy y . The forum lasts an hour or two, but afterwards we found time, we exchanged phone numbers and email addresses, and that’s how we connected.’’ Limor and Ziva added that they would often meet after the forum to process feelings which were aroused in the meetings. Another aspect of sharing relates to communal reflection. This joint reflection took place not only in the forum itself, but also continued beyond the COP meetings as teachers sought opportunities to reflect with each other. Ziva described this process using the terms: ‘‘collective reflection’’ and ‘‘collective thinking.’’ For her, this occurred when teachers presented their own methods to the group, and engaged the group in reflective discussion about their teaching. Limor distinguishes between individual and group reflection. She states that when she thinks about the activities on her own, she can make changes and improvements; however, when she is part of a group reflecting together, she benefits from hearing multiple viewpoints and feedback related to her dilemma, thus her learning is more significant.

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

Professional Assurance. One of the major findings in the interviews was the contribution of the forum to the teachers’ sense of professional selfassurance. Whether they entered the COP with certainty about their methods of teaching the Holocaust or with serious fears and trepidations, they concluded the experience with a sense of well-being and satisfaction about their practice. Limor saw herself as an expert both in the Holocaust in its pedagogy, based on her participation in a college program. Despite this certitude, she claims that the COP opened her up to new ideas and to a reexamination of her current practice, processes which strengthened her sense of control over the material and its age appropriateness. She summed up her feelings: ‘‘It lifted a huge burden from me, that I’m doing a good job y . and this year I’m relaxed.’’ In contrast to Limor’s initial confidence, Nurit, a veteran teacher, lacked confidence in her Holocaust teaching. As a result of her experience in the COP, her newfound sense of security was accompanied by a sense of release. She explained these feelings in the following quote: ‘‘I suddenly felt for the first time I chose something for myself which I wanted, and which I think suits me. It allowed me approach the children from a totally different place.’’ The support of the forum enabled Nurit to discover herself professionally, as she stated ‘‘I felt that I have a firm backing in this forum.’’ Regardless of their initial level of discomfort with teaching the Holocaust, these teachers acquired through the


197

forum a sense of calm and serenity through their knowledge that their practice had been acknowledge and enriched by the group and then confirmed by their actual teaching.

Practice

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Practice is ‘‘a set of socially defined ways of doing things in a specific domain: a set of common approaches and shared standards that create a basis for action, communication, problem solving, performance, and accountability’’ (Wenger et al., 2002). Our COP dynamically defined this element through the continuing development of the teachers. Their interviews revealed two major components of practice: reflection and professional development. For the participants, reflection about their teaching of the Holocaust became a major thrust of their communal endeavor and included acquiring reflective skills and becoming more mindful in their practice. The second component, professional development, relates to changes which each teacher experienced regarding her teaching the Holocaust specifically as well as other emotionally laden topics. Beyond this topical focus, the teachers experienced personal growth and renewal related to their thinking about child centered curriculum and their teaching practice as a whole.

(c )

Em

Reflecting on the Child in Holocaust Education The teachers in the past had based their Holocaust activities on simplistic understandings of what it means to bring the Holocaust to children and on formulas which they had been given at workshops. Now their approach is more sophisticated and includes a focus on the child and her understanding of the material. Their practice is enriched by their newfound abilities to think about the topic in relationship to the child in a holistic fashion. Nurit became aware of her shallow approach to teaching the Holocaust in the past. She now understands the need to think more deeply about how she relates to the topic and the need to evaluate her teaching after the fact. She explained her new understanding that teaching the Holocaust is a process built on preparatory as well as follow-up activities which support the child emotionally. Her new approach is much broader than before. The forum supported Karen’s reflection on her practice. She became critical of her own selection of stories to tell about the Holocaust, and she now thinks about ‘‘where I am doing the right thing and where I am going astray.’’ More importantly, she claimed that she has learned to listen to the children in

198


Pu

bl

is h

in g

order to verify the appropriateness of her own teaching. In a similar fashion, Anat’s reflection focused on the child rather than the topic. She described how she now examines the significance of the story for the child. She no longer teaches the Holocaust as a requirement, rather because she has found a way to significantly connect the material to the child. She elucidated reflective questions which she now asks herself in preparing the Holocaust activities: ‘‘How do I help the child? What will the child do with this material? How will it influence the child?’’ Limor added that the reflective process included looking closely at how the children responded to the Holocaust activity. Tova engaged in deep reflection about her decision not to mention the Holocaust at all. She decided to video herself standing silently during the 2-minute siren, in order to examine the children’s reactions as they continued to play. These various reflective tools mirrored the focus on the child, which the teachers now defined as a central part of their practice in dealing with the Holocaust in the early childhood classroom.

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Mindfulness For some of the teachers, the forum did not change specifically what they did; rather it led them to be more mindful in their thinking about their teaching. This aspect of practice includes not only thinking in general but also about choices which the teachers made throughout the teaching process. Karen stated: ‘‘I have a very clear agenda about how I teach things. The forum just sharpened for me how to think about (how I teach).’’ Anat expanded on this point, explaining: ‘‘The forum gave importance to thinking about issues. You don’t come, plan something, and go.’’ In terms of making choices, Karen claimed that she is now more goal focused, and she thinks more about which elements to use in planning her Holocaust teaching. Limor added that she has learned to be more mindful of her choice of words. Reflection about their own thinking on the Holocaust enabled each teacher to formulate for herself an approach which matched her own sensibilities about the topic. Anat compared her own teaching methods with those of others. This critical reflection allowed her to develop methods which were appropriate to her, as she saw that others had created approaches appropriate to them. Nurit’s mindfulness took a different form than that of Anat. When Anat realized that other teachers’ approaches were matched to their own emotions and understandings, she rejected her current method and then she created a new approach which was mindful of her own feelings and thoughts. Nurit, on the other hand, selected for herself from among all the suggestions which teachers raised in the forum. She chose


199

what is appropriate for the children in her kindergarten and for herself, and then she knew that she would able to cope with it. Through the COP, each teacher came to think about the Holocaust as a domain for herself and for her children both on a cognitive and emotional level.

bl

is h

in g

Professional Development Professional development consists of competencies, beliefs, and effectiveness (Scheerens, 2010). We found that the professional development of the teachers was an essential component of their joint practice as it unfolded through the COP. This development came to the fore in two ways: professionalization in dealing with the Holocaust and other emotionally charged topics in addition to professionalization as early childhood educators in their daily work in the classroom. Each of these areas will be presented separately with evidence from the interviews.

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

Professional Development Related to the Holocaust Teachers joined the COP in order to address the teaching of the Holocaust; therefore, this aspect of professional development was expected. Prior to their participation in the COP, some teachers described a weak personal connection to the topic. Either because it lacked significance for them or because of their concerns and fears, their investment in the teaching of the Holocaust was peripheral. This initial distance from the topic morphed into intense involvement as seen in the interviews. Through her participation in the forum, Karen’s emotional investment in Holocaust teaching deepened her identity with the topic. The forum became a powerful emotional experience for her, and further motivated her to invest in the topic as an active agent. Anat experienced a similar trajectory, as she moved from teaching the topic because it was required, to finding deep significance for both her and the children. Her experience in the forum enabled her to focus on giving significance to her Holocaust teaching. This focus on the child is also seen in Nurit’s insight about how her approach to the Holocaust and other emotionally laden topics had transformed. She stated emphatically: ‘‘First of all, the biggest change is to open those topics and enter into them, without fear. To allow the children to express their feelings and to reflect back on them.’’ Tova’s development centered on acquiring a sense of security and assurance regarding her own approach to the Holocaust, which she generated through deep thinking. Tova’s development reflects maturation resulting from her independent thinking about the Holocaust. In this process she abandoned a rigid lesson plan and chose not to relate to the topic at all, a decision which she made with self-assurance and serenity.

200


ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Limor also reached a position of self-satisfaction about her Holocaust teaching; however, her path was fraught with discomfort. In listening to the other members’ comments and methods, she reconsidered her own practice. Different from previous years when she approached Holocaust Remembrance Day with great confidence, this time she experienced significant difficulties. She apprehended the day with agitated feelings based on her insecurity related to whether her established methods were indeed valid. ‘‘In the past, it flowed easily for me. Now I had to look at my lesson plan and read what I had written y My hands were sweating.’’ After successfully executing her usual lesson plan, she felt secure in her decision to maintain her practice from previous years. The expectation of both the initiators of the COP and the teachers who joined the group was to generate developmentally appropriate lesson plans about teaching the Holocaust. However, the major findings from our data show that the teachers’ emotional growth far exceeded their cognitive satisfaction. Though both the emotional and cognitive realms of the Holocaust came to the fore in the COP, the teachers reported their significant professional growth largely in affective terms.

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

Development as an Early Childhood Professional Although the purpose of the COP was to support the teachers in creating suitable approaches to dealing with the Holocaust in their practice, we found that each of the participants identified for herself significant contributions of the forum to her work in all areas of the curriculum and to her theoretical understandings of the early childhood profession in general. This section will focus on each of these two levels of general professional development, the practical and the theoretical. Professional Development: Practical Aspects. Faced with the emotionally charged topic of the Holocaust, most of the teachers in the forum entered the COP with a sense of uncertainty and lack of confidence in their ability to adequately address this topic. Through their participation in the COP, they each reached a pedagogical solution which was appropriate to them and to the children they teach. They each carried out their own plan on Holocaust Remembrance Day and discussed the results reflectively with the group. This experience resulted in their acquiring a sense of efficacy about reaching pedagogical solutions to difficult topics in others areas of the curriculum. For example, Anat stated: ‘‘The forum taught me that y it is possible to deal with it, it is possible to find a way to do it.’’ Based on her learning in the COP she broadened her view of teaching and began to seek significance for


201

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

the child in every topic she teaches. She was deeply influenced by the teacher who chose not to teach the Holocaust at all, and she sees this decision as a legitimate pedagogic solution for other emotionally charged topics as well. She concluded: ‘‘This differs from the decision not to teach because it is a difficult topic for the teacher, or the teacher fears that she might make a mistake and cause harm to the children.’’ Nurit noted a different aspect of her practical work. She claimed that the forum enabled her to think about ‘‘alternative ways of working with the children.’’ In the past, she had limited herself to a single approach on every topic; however, now this block has been lifted as she has become tolerant of different viewpoints, and even welcomes these challenges to her existing practice. She further explained that now when she hears a new pedagogic idea her curiosity is peaked, and she has learned to ask questions which help her examine the idea from multiple perspectives. In addition, she learned to think about building curriculum around a topic with many layers, including laying a conceptual foundation, broadening the scope of her activities, and following up with further learning experiences to help the children internalize the essential material. She summarized these changes in her teaching: ‘‘Today my approach is much broader.’’ For Karen, the forum supported her using her own ‘‘creative imagination’’ to create new teaching materials, new stories, which she had been reluctant to do in the past. Similar to Nurit, Karen expanded her thinking about preparing and using new material. She claims that she has ‘‘become more professional’’ by adopting a more thoughtful planning process. At first she examines what the children know by meeting with a small group and listening to their discussion on the topic and second, she tries out her newly crafted story with a small pilot group to determine its appropriateness for the entire class. Through the COP these teachers became empowered to find pedagogic solutions not only to the Holocaust experience but also to other areas of the curriculum as well. Professional Development: Theoretical Aspects. In addition to the teacher growth related to practical aspects of teaching, the COP also supported change on a deeper level regarding how the teachers understand learning and teaching. Although these aspects did not relate to concrete implementations, their significance became apparent when the teachers spoke about the contribution of the COP to their development as early childhood professionals. These changes centered on different aspects of teacher thinking. Karen noted that the forum ‘‘sharpened for me how to think about how I teach.’’ She went on to explain about choices in teaching, and her newfound interest in seeking and evaluating these alternatives in

202


ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

all aspects of her teaching. She added that she is now more goal focused, not only in the Holocaust teaching, but in every aspect of her thinking about her own teaching. Ziva now puts more emphasis on the child as a learner, expanding her professional thinking to include both cognitive and emotional levels of understanding. Limor has come to see herself as a learner, and now appreciates the value of reflecting on her own feelings about topics she will teach as a basis for grappling with difficulties the children may have in their understanding. This insight of both her own feelings and those of the children have brought her to enjoy teaching ‘‘with much love.’’ This self-awareness is mirrored in Tova’s assessment of her development through the COP. She claims that she has become an independent thinker about pedagogy, as she has developed confidence in her abilities to make difficult decisions. She added that she has acquired a disposition for inquiry which arose from the open searching she did with the group for a pedagogy which fits her sensibilities and the needs of the children she teaches. This inquiry and openness has broad implications for her beyond the classroom, as she stated:

d

G

I want to bring to my class something of quality y , so I investigate and select y . I know that this is not only for right now. This teaches me, this is professional development y . This has opened my thinking in many areas of my life.

(c )

Em

er

al

Whereas the teachers initially joined the COP to learn about the teaching of the Holocaust, they found much more in the experience, including for some a renewal of themselves as early childhood educators.

Summary of Findings

The major findings in this study relate to how the teachers viewed the COP as a significant professional development initiative, and how they viewed their own growth within the forum. Their initial interest in the domain of Holocaust teaching attracted them to the group, and the intimate and interactive structure of the COP promoted their thinking about the topic itself and about its pedagogy. What enabled the teachers to learn in the forum was first and foremost the breaking of their extreme isolation not only regarding Holocaust teaching but also their work as teachers in separated classrooms. The authentic discourse within an intimate group was a welcomed change from the usual anonymous professional development lectures which they are required to attend. The cooperation and sharing which took place in the COP supported peer learning and mutual


203

is h

DISCUSSION

in g

reinforcement for daring to try out new ideas. Thus professional assurance was achieved as a result of the reflective feedback in the group. The importance of reflection in the group stood out as a shared aspect of their practice, and contributed to adapting a style of mindfulness in approaching the teaching of Holocaust, other emotionally laden topics, and with additional components of early childhood teaching. Professional development was markedly individual as each teacher reached her own pedagogic solution to the teaching of the Holocaust, but in addition, openness to alternatives, and a broadening of their view of curriculum development marked renewal for many of the teachers.

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

The findings in this study point to a congruence between the theoretical description of the COP (Wenger et al., 2002) and its efficacy in supporting early childhood educators in coping with an emotionally laden topic. The particular features of the COP: domain, community, and practice lend clarity to our examination of the research questions of this study in light of the findings. Each question will be addressed separately in terms of the findings presented above.

Em

The COP as a Professional Development Framework

(c )

Genuine professional development revolves around effective learning and growth for the individual practitioner. Wenger et al. (2002) postulate the social nature of professional learning, and suggest that community is a necessary component of change and growth. This hypothesis is borne out in our data, which show that the COP first and foremost served to break the isolation of the teachers, which is structurally built into their work in the Israeli kindergartens and preschools. In considering the utility of the COP as an appropriate professional development framework, the subject of breaking isolation plays a central role. The teachers who participated in the COP reflected ‘‘organizational citizenship behaviors’’ (Oplatka, 2006, 2007; Somech & Ron, 2007) which represent voluntary activities beyond their usual job description. Their active peer interactions focused on their own professional development and gave them a sense of belonging to a group of significant others, which in turn helped break their isolation (Ganz-Aloni, 2003). Furthermore involvement in the COP increased their range of

204


(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

professional activity, thereby reducing their sense of aloneness (Organ, Podsakoff & Mackenzie, 2006; Vigoda-Gadot, Beeri, Birman-Shemesh, & Somech, 2007). Hadar and Brody (2010) stress the importance of breaking isolation as a prerequisite to subsequent professional learning and change. By providing an intimate group, with a dynamic and dependable leader, the COP supplied the basic conditions for learning. In addition, teachers noted the quality of the discourse, which was enabled by a safe and nonjudgmental environment. The openness of the group supported peer learning, as teachers cooperated in their joint venture to seek individual solutions to a pressing pedagogic problem. These features of the COP enabled the teachers to make progress because they were able to place themselves squarely inside the topic in such a way they could feel comfortable to deal with it emotionally (Goleman, 2006). Another aspect of the group structure which supported professional development was the process by which teachers openly explored new ideas, presented their own approaches to the group for communal feedback and reflection, tried out their teaching methods, and then brought back the results for further group reflection. This process gave backing to the teachers for finding their genuine voice in the curriculum building process, and resulted in professional assurance and a sense of well-being. These community aspects of the COP contributed to its effectiveness for the early childhood educators’ professional development, as was found by Poyas and Smith (2007) with clinical supervisors in a similar type of community structure. Another highly significant feature of the forum was the control given to the teachers over the domain, or field of inquiry, which the group focused on. The teachers not only chose the topic they wished to collectively explore over the years, they also initiated and achieved approval of a request to continue the topic for an additional year. This process resulted in a high level of investment for the teachers in their own professional development. Thus the community and domain aspects of the COP both contributed to the effectiveness of the COP in the professional development endeavor. It should be added that the overall ethos of caring (Taggart, 2011) among the teachers enabled them to remain focused on the needs of the child as the central driving force of the COP.

The COP’s Contribution to Dealing with the Holocaust The second research question addresses how the COP contributed to teacher learning about dealing with the Holocaust. This question deals


205

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

mainly with the domain of Holocaust teaching, the focus of the COP. The findings show that the teachers did not acquire specific methodologies about the teaching of the Holocaust; rather they developed their thinking about the topic. First, through the group discourse, they deeply considered the Holocaust as a domain for early childhood, its appropriateness, and possibilities for seeking significance with the topic for young children. Without exception, this was the first time these teachers had been afforded the opportunity to consider these questions. Their exploration of the domain on a theoretical level enabled the teachers to plumb their own thinking and that of their colleagues as a prerequisite for thinking about possible pedagogies. Ritchart, Church, and Morrison (2010) stress the importance of active and visible thinking to achieving understanding. Thus in our group, the thinking aspect of the COP was found to push forward the process of genuine change based on the teachers’ understandings. When they moved on to thinking about teaching the Holocaust, they explored both cognitive and emotional facets of the topic. In addition, they came to realize the necessity of facing their own feelings and thoughts as adults. This process has been viewed by Swartz and McElwain (2012) as crucial to the teacher’s ability to help children cope with emotionally difficult situations. Thus the domain shifted from the usual handing over of curriculum to the teachers (Brody, 2009; Goldhirsh, 2008) to a coconstruction process which enabled individuals to find their own solutions with support of their colleagues. Urban (2008) suggests such ‘‘dialogic activity of asking critical questions and creating understandings across differences’’ is particularly suited to the early childhood profession. Although domain was the primary factor of the COP to help the teachers learn to deal with the Holocaust, the community also played an important role. Becoming part of a group which legitimated questioning and allowed teachers to admit their fears, concerns, and lack of confidence, the teachers found support and backing which was appropriate for dealing with this emotionally laden topic. The effectiveness of the COP in implementing change in the teachers’ approach to dealing with the Holocaust as due in part to the ability of the community to support teachers’ talking about their past practice in a reflective manner. Our findings bring several examples of such reflection on past practice, showing that the COP created a safe place to bring up the past without a need to justify it. Rather it allowed a reexamination of the past, thus providing an opportunity for professional growth.

206


Contributions of the COP to Professional Development of Early Childhood Educators

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

The third research question addresses the utility of the COP for professional development, as it seeks to identify those issues which came to the fore in this particular initiative. The major contribution of the COP to the teaching of the Holocaust is the emotional preparedness of the teacher to deal with the topic, a gain achieved through several channels. Heightening the teachers’ awareness of the importance of their need to deal seriously with the topic became the first step to building a sense of efficacy among the teachers (Scheerens, 2010). Second, the forum helped them acquire assurance about their chosen method, and thus reduce their fears and concerns about teaching the topic. As they each developed their own approach derived from their independent thinking which was reflected back on the group, their self-confidence grew. Thus the teachers used the group support for paving their own unique path. When reaching beyond the domain of Holocaust education, the COP managed to support professional development on a wider scale, both on a practical and a theoretical level. Using the development of age appropriate Holocaust curriculum as a model, the teachers each learned important skills for approaching other topics. One such skill is broadening the scope of the curriculum from a narrow focus to a wider more encompassing paradigm. Taking a more thoughtful systematic outlook on curriculum building meant for the teachers a reshuffling of priorities, placing emphasis on the children’s needs as learners on both cognitive and emotional levels. Teachers also came to value their own thoughts and feelings, which can be all important when dealing with an emotionally laden topic. Thus acquiring new teaching paradigms enabled the teachers to practically approach other topics in their curriculum with newfound confidence. An additional effect of the COP on the teachers relates to a more abstract level of thinking about teaching young children, a process which added significance to the teachers’ daily work. Like Baildon and Damico (2008) who found a profound influence of the COP on the beliefs and practices of teachers, we also noted changes in attitudes and dispositions regarding the teaching of young children, perhaps through the modeling of these factors in the forum. There is a sharpening of focus, identification of choices, and an awareness that choices are available or can be created. This efficacy grows out of a sense of oneself as an independent pedagogic thinker, capable of honestly assessing readymade solutions as well as original suggestions of others. Seeing themselves as active learners, itself a mind


207

bl

Pu

Empowerment

is h

in g

opening innovation, these teachers became excited about thinking and about inquiry learning. Thus they developed dispositions for opening options, assessing them, and reaching new solutions which can work differently and perhaps more effectively than long held beliefs and habits. Likewise, their sense of responsibility toward supporting children in dealing with the Holocaust was heightened throughout their COP experience, thus addressing a lacuna in early childhood accountability standards (Lauermann & Karabenick, 2011). In Wenger’s (1998) earlier work on the COP, he stressed the importance of the community in finding meaning and significance in one’s work. Thus the changes which teachers in our COP adopted exemplify Wenger’s notion of seeking and finding meaning through the forum.

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

As a group of educators in Israel, early childhood teachers stand out as particularly powerless, and this status has been found among early childhood educators in other countries as well (Overton, 2009). Their program is dictated by a national curriculum, as translated for them by their direct supervisor, or inspector. While in principle, the teachers must operate within the confines of the standards imposed on them, in fact they have a wide range of play within their own isolated classrooms. The inspectors are spread very thin, with over 100 teachers to supervise in as many physical structures. Despite their individual judgment, the teachers operate under a premise that they are handed curriculum to implement, including teaching of the Holocaust (Ben-Amos & Bet-El, 1999). Therefore, the COP turned the tables for these teachers by posing a basic premise that they should determine the content of their own professional development, and that they should take responsibility for their own pedagogic decisions. Instead of delivering tools to teach, the COP provided a framework for thinking about teaching. The teachers were encouraged to examine their existing practice, to learn about other approaches, and to critically evaluate these various pedagogies in light of their own sensibilities which ran very deep for each of the participants. For many, this was the first time they had been asked to examine their feelings about a curriculum topic. In addition, this was the first occasion of empowerment for choosing for themselves a methodology which they deemed appropriate. Together with this autonomy came an obligation to the community, to their peers with whom they shared their thoughts and actions. Thus the COP combined development of thinking

208


(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

with professional commitment to the standards of the guild and the backing of their peers. This study examined the workings of one COP focused on an emotionally charged topic. Its scope is limited by the cultural context in which it took place. In addition, it should be noted that the group was highly homogenous in its composition, as the teachers were all graduates of the same college and were under the supervision of the same state inspector. Further research needs to be undertaken using the COP model for professional development among early childhood educators in different contexts. Since the premise of this model is a self-selection of the domain, it would be insightful to learn how other domains might in themselves affect the professional development outcomes. The implications of this study relate to the usefulness of the COP model for addressing the professional development of early childhood educators dealing with emotionally laden topics. As has been shown in the findings, this model holds promise for such endeavors on both a personal and professional level for the teachers who clearly benefit from the group support and mutual feedback. On a system wide basis, the model might be employed as a voluntary framework for those who are interested in a particular emotionally laden topic such as death, divorce, natural disasters, terror, and war. A different approach would be to assign teachers to a COP group, and each group could choose its own focus for professional development. Although this approach may not specifically address emotionally laden topics, it could lead to empowerment and efficacy for the teachers. The COP model presented in this study is premised on the need for teachers to take control of their own professional development. With the help of appropriate scaffolding provided by competent leaders, the study shows how listening to the teachers’ voice promotes significant educational change.

NOTE 1. Personal communication, August 4, 2011.

REFERENCES Admati Research International. (2000). Mapping of the needs of kindergarten teachers: An investigation of attitudes and conceptions. (Hebrew). Tel Aviv: Amercalot Mechozot. Baildon, M., & Damico, J. (2008). Negotiating epistemological challenges in thinking and practice: A case study of a literacy and inquiry tool as a mediator of professional conversation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(6), 1645–1657.


209

(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Ben-Amos, A., & Bet-El, I. (1999). Holocaust day and memorial day in Israeli schools: Ceremonies, education and history. Israeli Studies, 4(1), 258–284. Brody, D. (2009). Sailing through stormy seas: An Israeli kindergarten teacher confronts Holocaust remembrance day. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(2). Brody, D., & Cohen, H. (in press). ‘‘Touch it lightly’’: Students’ construction of pedagogical paradigms about an emotionally-laden topic. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 33(3). Curry, M. (2008). Critical friends groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional communities aimed at instructional improvement and school reform. Teachers College Record, 110(4), 733–774. Eizenberg, M. (2005). Shalvei hitpathut v’gormim contextualim hamahpiyim ak tahalihim uhavayot bekrira hamikzoit shel haganenet bashanim vachronim [Developmental stages and contextual factors influencing the processes and experiences in the professional careers of kindergarten teachers in their first years]. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Ben Gurion University, Beersheva, Israel. (Hebrew). Frost, J. H., Akmal, T. T., & Kingrey, J. U. (2010). Planning teacher professional development: The struggles and success of an inter-organizational collaboration. Professional Development in Education, 36(4), 581–595. Ganz-Aloni, R. (2003). Olaman shel gananot – tzrachim veyachesai gomlin [The world of the kindergarten teacher – needs and reciprocity]. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. (Hebrew). Golden, D. (2005). Childhood as protected space? Vulnerable bodies in an Israeli kindergarten. Ethnos, 70(1), 79–100. Goldhirsh, O. (2008). Remembrance day for the holocaust and heroism in the kindergarten. (Hebrew). Retrieved from http://cms.education.gov.il/educationcms/units/preschool/ moreshet/tkasim/zicaronshoagvura.htm. Accessed on September 11, 2010. Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Bantam Books. Hadar, L., & Brody, D. (2010). From isolation to symphonic harmony: Building a community of learners among teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(8), 1641–1651. Josselson, R., Lieblich, A., & McAdams, D. P. (2002). Up close and personal: The teaching and learning of narrative research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Lauermann, F., & Karabenick, S. A. (2011). Taking teacher responsibility into account(ability): Explicating its multiple components and theoretical status. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 122–140. Oplatka, I. (2006). Going beyond role expectation: Toward an understanding of the determination and components of teacher organizational citizenship behavior. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 385–423. Oplatka, I. (2007). Managing emotions in teaching: Toward an understanding of emotion displays and caring as non-prescribed role elements. Teachers College Record, 109(6), 1374–1400. Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & Mackenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Overton, J. (2009). Early childhood teachers in contexts of power: Empowerment and a voice. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 34(2), 1–10. Poyas, Y., & Smith, K. (2007). Becoming a community of practice – The blurred identity of clinical faculty teacher educators. Teacher Development, 11(3), 313–334.

210


(c )

Em

er

al

d

G

ro u

p

Pu

bl

is h

in g

Ritchart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2010). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for all learners. New York, NY: JosseyBass. Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Scheerens, J. (Ed.). (2010). Europe in international comparison: An analysis of teachers’ professional development based on the OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/education/school-education/doc/ talis/report_en.pdf. Accessed on January 27, 2012. Somech, A., & Ron, I. (2007). Promoting organizational citizenship behavior in schools: The impact of individual and organizational characteristics. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(1), 38–66. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Swartz, R. A., & McElwain, N. L. (2012). Preservice teachers’ emotion-related regulation and cognition: Associations with teachers’ responses to children’s emotions in early childhood classrooms. Early Education and Development, 23(2), 202–226. Taggart, G. (2011). Don’t we care? The ethics and emotional labour of early years professionalism. Early Years: An International Journal of Research and Development, 31(1), 85–95. Unger, L. (2003). Hakesher ben sipuk tzorchei haganenet kemeafyanei kehilot hagan [The connection between satisfaction of the needs of the kindergarten teacher and communal aspects of the kindergarten]. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Ben Gurion University, Beersheva, Israel. (Hebrew). Urban, M. (2008). Dealing with uncertainty: Challenges and possibilities for the early childhood profession. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 16(2), 135–152. Vigoda-Gadot, E., Beeri, I., Birman-Shemesh, T., & Somech, A. (2007). Group-level organizational citizenship behavior in the education system: A scale reconstruction and validation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(4), 462–493. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.