Introduction
Chapter 1 outlined and reviewed the literature related to early career teachers (ECTs) from their first to their fifth year of teaching. The results of the review revealed that on commencing their new teaching careers in a school, ECTs must immediately navigate their new world. This is different from the one they were initially trained in, and ECTs often fall into a crevasse between these two different worlds. Feiman-Nemser and Buchmann (Reference Feiman-Nemser and Buchmann1985, p. 53) call this the “two-worlds pitfall” because some ECTs can be wrenched between following implementation of the content and knowledge they obtained in their teacher preparation program and following the school’s values, which may be quite different from what they have learned before. Many teachers in this first year report that such a dilemma can cause enormous stress because they have a difficult time transitioning into a new environment. Unfortunately, the research reveals that some do not survive these first-year shocks, and their ensuing “rollercoaster ride” of emotions (Mansfield et al., Reference Mansfield, Beltman and Price2014) ultimately leads to many even leaving the profession. Of the ECTs who actually survive this first-year “praxis shock” (Smagorinsky et al., Reference Smagorinsky, Gibson, Bickmore, Moore and Cook2004), many face multiple other challenges that can be overwhelming and very stressful if they lack support from the school, and if left unchecked, can lead to ECTs deciding to leave the profession (McCarthy et al., Reference McCarthy, Fitchett, Lambert and Boyle2020). When and if this continues through the ECTs’ first five years, as their workload increases and job-related stressors increase, many feel even more exhausted with resultant increases in teacher attrition (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, Reference Skaalvik and Skaalvik2018).
Moreover, the review in Chapter 1 disclosed that ECT attrition was even reaching “epidemic proportions” in 2020 (OECD, 2020), even before the COVID-19 pandemic in the years since then and its impact on teacher attrition. More recent research reported by the National Education Association in the US revealed that 55 percent of current teachers want to leave the profession due to stress and burnout from the pandemic (Rainey, Reference Rainey2022). In addition, although ECT attrition has been noted and researched in general education and has been recognized as a long-running concern for teacher-educators, researchers, policymakers, teachers, and other stakeholders, no such research about the experiences of early career English as a second language (ESL) teachers has been conducted in any context before (or during) the pandemic that this author is aware of. This chapter outlines how I got the stories of the lived experiences of seven ESL teachers presented in this book. In particular, the chapter outlines the theoretical approach, with as many details of the participants and context as I can provide for ethical reasons of protecting their identities, explaining the data collection and analysis methods and laying out the overall guiding reflective practice framework that was used as a lens for the teachers to explore their lives, thus setting the scene for all the other chapters that will follow.
Prologue
Considering then that most reviews of the research on ECTs indicate insufficient case-study research on their real, everyday experiences, the multiple case studies outlined and described in this book provide these usually absent voices, using their own words as much as possible. More specifically, the main objective of this book is to document, through reflective practice, the lived experiences of the seven teachers.
By providing a holistic story through the lens of reflective practice of the complex real-life experiences of these early career ESL teacher professionals, I hope readers will gain a better understanding of their own teaching worlds. According to Bullough (Reference Bullough, Loughran and Russell1997), telling such a story is “a way of getting a handle on what [they] believe, on models, metaphors, and images that underpin action and enable meaning-making, on [their] theories” (p. 19). Freeman (Reference Freeman, Li, Mahony and Richards1994) has pointed out the importance of listening to English language teachers’ voices about what they do because it is necessary to put teachers at the center of telling their stories. Freeman (Reference Freeman, Li, Mahony and Richards1994) maintains that “putting teachers front and center in terms of listening to what they do follows the jazz maxim: ‘You have to know the story in order to tell the story’” (p. 89).
The general approach employed in the exploration of the lived experiences of all seven ESL teachers through the lens of reflective practice portrayed in this book follows a recent OECD report that acknowledges that it is crucial for ECTs to become “reflective professionals” so that they can better “understand the nature of the difficulties they encounter” (OECD (2018), p. 8). The idea of ECTs becoming “reflective professionals” is based on the premise that engaging in systematic reflection on their practice can better enable them to move more smoothly through the phases of adaptation they will experience during their early years. In this book, such systematic reflection is operationalized holistically by encouraging early career ESL teachers to use the framework for reflecting on practice that focuses on philosophy, principles, theory, practice, and beyond practice (or critical reflection) (Farrell, Reference Farrell2012b; Reference Farrell2015a; Reference Farrell2019a; Reference Farrell2019b; Reference Farrell2019c).
Under an overall constructivist paradigm in which knowledge is “based on the reality of the world we experience and live in” (Onwuegbuzie & Frels, Reference Onwuegbuzie and Frels2013, p. 18), a qualitative research design was used to capture the complex reality of these early career ESL teachers’ working lives (Richards, Reference Richards2003) and provide a deeper understanding of the forces that shape and influence their daily work experiences (Buchanan et al., Reference Buchanan, Prescott, Schuck, Aubusson, Burke and Louviere2013). Specifically, the investigation focused on the experiences of seven early career ESL teachers as a “collective” case study (Stake, Reference Stake, Denzin and Lincoln2005), making it possible to investigate the similarities and differences among the early career ESL teachers at different critical points; thus, the cases are individually and collectively “bounded” (Merriam, Reference Merriam1988, p. 9). Indeed, most previous research investigations into ECT attrition in general education studies have used large-scale surveys with few interviews, discussions, or observations with individual teacher participants.
The case studies outlined in this book explore the deeper narratives of the participants through the use of interviews and individual discussions, journal writing, and classroom observations, all of which provided opportunities for the teachers to tell their stories about their experiences of being early career ESL teachers. Thus, my approach is designed to “generate illustrative outcomes drawing strength from the rich particularity of individual cases” (Richards, Reference Richards and Hinkel2011, p. 216). The very richness of the data can help generate new thinking and new ideas about early career ESL teacher education, development, and retention. Such a case study approach facilitates an understanding that human actions are important actions and not simple occurrences, or mere cause and effect, but chronologies to be understood through the collection of meaningful information (Merriam, Reference Merriam1988). Other TESOL scholars have successfully utilized a similar case study approach for related types of research (e.g., Farrell & Ives, Reference Farrell and Ives2015; Lamb, Reference Lamb2007; Tsui, Reference Tsui2007). As VanLier (2005) attested, rigorous analysis of such case studies can provide in-depth insights into intricate pedagogical and contextual issues that “cannot be done adequately in any other common research practice” (p. 195).
Participants
Participants were invited through email invitations to various teacher groups and from personal contacts who identified early career ESL teachers in their 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th years of teaching. Seven early career ESL teachers responded with interest, and after explaining the details of what they would be doing in terms of their reflective journey using the framework for reflecting on practice as a lens, five of them volunteered to take part in the study. In addition, and by chance, two other more experienced ESL teachers in their 7th and 10th years of teaching respectively, also volunteered to reflect on their practice after hearing about the study using the same reflective practice framework as the other teachers.
In order to protect their identities, I use pseudonyms for each teacher. At the time of the study, three were employed part-time in different institutions, while the other four worked full-time. I provide more information on each ECT in the chapter in which they are featured; however, I do not point out their specific characteristics for reasons of anonymity. I fully recognize that not giving a fuller description of the ECTs may lead to a severe limitation of the results, but I do so for ethical reasons, as they are in the early stages of their teaching careers. I assure readers that the findings reported in each chapter are very real.
Reflective Break
Why is it important to protect the anonymity of the early career ESL teachers in this book?
I provide only brief outlines of the teachers’ education and qualifications, to protect their identities. What problems might this cause for readers’ interpretation of the results?
Data Collection and Analysis
I managed the process as a whole so that the teacher-participants could have space in which to reflect on their own practice. Together with four research assistants, I collected data from each participant, initially for approximately five weeks. This included transcribed, semi-structured interviews and follow-up discussions, written reflection tasks, and classroom observations (Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a). More specifically, multiple interviews were conducted throughout the five weeks: a pre-interview to clarify basic information and five follow-up interviews following each stage of the reflective practice framework. In addition, I and/or a research assistant observed each participant teaching three different lessons, which were also recorded (video and audio), and each teacher was interviewed for about thirty minutes before and after each lesson about their planning and what they thought transpired during that lesson. When all the reflections of each stage were written up at the end of the five weeks, they were sent to each participant by email for their reactions and interpretations (Marková et al., Reference Marková, Linell, Grossen and Orvig2007). Participants sent in their written reactions to the findings of each stage of the framework as well as their overall responses to their lived experiences during their specific year of teaching. Each participant also completed a written reflection task at each stage of the framework (six in total) in response to various questions posed as initial prompts. These questions are given in Appendix A.
Data analysis consisted of seeking responses to the one overarching research question: What are five early career ESL teachers’ reflections, as expressed through their reflections on philosophy, principles, theory, and practice, and their reflections beyond practice? The same data analysis was also applied to the other two ESL teachers in their seventh and tenth years respectively. Data analysis started with inductive discovery to primarily deductive analysis (Merriam, Reference Merriam2009) while coding all the data collected. More specifically, data were coded by the four research assistants and then organized into different categories according to the stages of the framework for reflective practice (see Appendix B for illustrative examples of coding at each stage of the framework). It should be noted that although there are five separate stages, there was in fact a lot of overlap between the stages, so it was sometimes difficult to separate data into a distinct stage. Nevertheless, where possible, attempts were made to place the overlapping reflections and comments into the particular stage that the teacher was addressing at the time. For example, if a teacher made a direct comment related to a previous or future stage, it was placed in the relevant stage for coding purposes.
In terms of reaching an overall generalization of the findings, I also want to point out that this is not an overall goal of this qualitative reflective project. Rather, and as Creswell (Reference Creswell1994) points out, the purpose of this qualitative reflective project is “not to generalize findings, but to form a unique interpretation of events” (p. 159), or as I would like to put it in lay terms, ‘I want to walk in these teachers’ shoes for a while and see what they see.’ “Member checking,” the most crucial technique for establishing credibility, according to Lincoln and Guba (Reference Lincoln and Guba1985, p. 3), was achieved by providing each teacher with a copy of their reflections at each stage of the framework, as well as the overall findings of this study. As such, each participant was provided with the opportunity to confirm or refute the accuracy of the data as initially reported. Each participant was later interviewed about their findings to allow them to note any perceived errors and to provide additional information. As Lincoln and Guba (Reference Lincoln and Guba1985) point out, member checking gives each participant “an immediate opportunity to correct errors of fact and challenge what are perceived to be wrong interpretations” and “provides the [participants] the opportunity to volunteer additional information” (p. 314).
Reflective Break
Do you think that the data collection procedures were adequate? Why or why not?
If not, what would you have added or subtracted from the above explanation?
Do you think that the data analysis procedures were adequate? Why or why not?
If not, what would you have added or subtracted from the above explanation?
Why do you think there will be a lot of overlap between the five stages of the framework? (See the following section for more details on the framework.) Do you think this can pose problems for data analysis? If yes, why? If not, why not?
What questions do you have about the validity of the findings reported in this book in terms of the sole use of the qualitative research paradigm?
Can you think of any other approach that could have been used to collect and analyze data?
Reflective Practice
Teaching as reflection is based on the assumption that teachers can learn from their professional experience through focused reflection on the nature and meaning of their teaching practices, as I have written before throughout my career (although I was not aware of this concept during my first five years as a teacher). Again, I would like to emphasize the influence of both Dewey’s (Reference Dewey1933) and Schön’s (Reference Schön1983) approaches on reflection as presented in this book because they moved the concept to a more rigorous form of evidence-based practice where a teacher systematically investigates an issue in order to discover a solution. Such evidence-based reflective practice allows teachers to articulate to themselves (and others) what they do, how they do it, why they do it, and what the impact of their teaching is on student learning. I also agree with Schön’s contributions to the practice of reflecting while acting, or reflection-in-action – practitioners should not limit reflection only to the period after the event. In addition, I believe that reflection should not be focused solely on solving teaching problems but should also allow for uncertainty in that we may not reach a clear solution. Thus, I was prompted to develop a more holistic approach to reflective practice for language teachers, which is outlined briefly in the following section (for details, see Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a; Reference Farrell2022). I now briefly outline the overall framework for reflecting on practice.
Framework for Reflecting on Practice
The framework for reflecting on practice that each of the seven ESL teachers used as a lens to examine their lived experiences is holistic in nature as it not only incorporates both Dewey’s (Reference Dewey1933) and Schön’s (Reference Schön1983) approaches as noted above, but also acknowledges the inner life of teachers as spiritual, moral, and emotional beings (see Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a and Reference Farrell2022 for details on the development of this framework). Thus, along with Dewey’s and Schön’s views of reflection as a cognitive act, the framework also acknowledges the emotional, non-cognitive aspects of reflection. This approach to reflective practice helps teachers to holistically explore their identities through reflection on philosophy, the first stage of the framework. It also expands awareness of teachers’ principles, including their assumptions, beliefs, and values. It further illuminates a teacher’s insight into the appropriateness of lesson planning and execution through reflection on theory and allows them space for intensive self-monitoring by gathering evidence on their actual teaching practices. Finally, it develops teachers’ critical thinking skills to help them better understand issues beyond teaching practice within their greater teaching context.
Such an approach to reflective practice develops integrated teachers as they move through the five interconnected levels because they have knowledge of who they are (their philosophy), why they do what they do (their principles), what they want to do (their theory), how they do it (their practice), and what it all means to them within their community (beyond practice). In such a manner, teachers will be able to better understand their principles, beliefs, and values, and how these relate to their practice and beyond practice (Farrell, Reference Farrell2019a, Reference Farrell2019b), and enhance “subject-matter knowledge, pedagogical expertise, self-awareness, understanding of learners, curriculum and materials, career advancement, and language upgrading” (Cirocki & Farrell, Reference Cirocki and Farrell2019, p. 2).
Philosophy is the first stage of a teacher’s reflections. I believe a teacher’s philosophy is a “window to the roots of a teacher’s practice because a philosophy of practice means each observable behavior has a reason that guides it even if it is implicit” (Farrell, Reference Farrell2019b, p. 84). By talking about past experiences that may have shaped their philosophy since birth, teachers obtain self-knowledge by reflect on their background (i.e., heritage, ethnicity, socioeconomic background, family, and personal values) (Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a). In addition, each teacher brings the “self” into each lesson they teach, and therefore each thought and action within each lesson is guided either consciously or subconsciously by the teacher-as-person, who cannot be separated from the act of teaching. In order to access this stage, each teacher was encouraged to reflect through the use of narrative frames (see Appendix A, Stage 1 for examples), where they tell a story of their experience or an account of their life through prompts. Narrative frames offer insight into the past “to uncover preconceived theories about teaching and learning” (Taggart & Wilson, Reference Taggart and Wilson1998, p. 164) as well as help second language teachers answer the question “Who am I?” through making sense of claims about their identity. Philosophy includes the teacher in a personal manner because teaching is multidimensional as it matters who the teacher is. I include the details of these questions within each chapter related to each teacher’s reflective journey.
The next stage is principles, or teachers’ assumptions, beliefs, and conceptions of teaching and learning. All three are considered part of a single system and are difficult to separate because they overlap a lot, pointing along the same continuum of meaning related to our principles. To access assumptions, teachers in the study were encouraged to reflect on teacher maxims (see Appendix A), as these guided instructional decisions (i.e., the example given was “maxim of empowerment” – give learners control). To articulate their beliefs, teachers were encouraged to reflect on their use of teaching metaphors. Clandinin (Reference Clandinin1986) noted that metaphors can be valuable clues to the way teachers view teaching and a guide to the way they act in the classroom. When teachers interact with this stage of reflective practice, they have an opportunity to explore whether their principles are transferable and/or reflected in their classroom practices.
Following reflection on principles, the next stage is to reflect on theory, examining the different choices a teacher makes about the particular skills that are taught (or that they think should be taught) in each lesson. A theory is “something we use to give understanding and attempts to answer the question ‘why?’ in order to increase knowledge of practice and realign thoughts regarding this” (Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a, p. 67). At this stage, the teacher focuses on reflection-for-action, or their overall planning in terms of their choice of activities, techniques, and methods, so that they can better understand how all these influences (or not) the roles of both the teacher and the students during a lesson. Each teacher was asked for any specific lesson plans before each teaching observation and then interviewed before and after the lesson about the plans and how they contributed (or not) to a successful lesson. By reflecting on theory, teachers can decide if they need to adjust their future plans in light of what happened in the lesson in terms of the lesson objectives, methods, and activities chosen for that lesson.
The ensuing stage is where teachers reflect on their actual classroom practices while they are teaching a lesson (reflection-in-action), and after they teach a lesson (reflection-on-action). When teachers engage in reflection-in-action they attempt to consciously stand back while they are teaching, as they monitor and adjust to changing circumstances during the lesson. When teachers engage in reflection-on-action, they examine what happened in a lesson after the event has taken place – this is a more delayed type of reflection than the former. This stage is strongly connected to the first three, as teachers are better placed to examine the convergence or divergence between their philosophy, principles, and theory with their actual teaching practice, which is the real beginning of “a process of reducing the discrepancy between what we [teachers] do and what we think we do” (Knezevic, 2001, p. 10).
The last stage, reflection beyond practice or critical reflection, entails exploring and examining the moral, political, emotional, and social issues that impact a teacher’s practice both inside and outside the classroom. As I have suggested elsewhere, when teachers reflect on their own lives and how “their past experiences may have shaped the construction and development of their basic philosophy of practice, they will then be able to reflect critically on their practice because they will become more mindful and self-aware” (Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a, p. 25). With the knowledge gained from this stage, teachers will be able to “contribute to social change for the betterment of students, colleagues, community, and society at large” (Farrell, Reference Farrell2015a, p. 86), as well as reflect on issues beyond classroom teaching practice (i.e., on textbooks, syllabuses, curriculums, and working conditions).
Although each of the five stages within the framework is treated separately, they are in fact all are linked, as each stage can influence the other; and thus the framework (all the stages) must be considered as a whole to give a holistic reflective practice experience. Reflection at each of the separated stages prevented each teacher from becoming overwhelmed with too much information and thus let them focus on one aspect of reflection at a time. In the study discussed in this book, each teacher began their reflections at the first stage and then moved through each respective stage outlined above at a pace they decided. The purpose of encouraging the early career ESL teachers to engage in reflection through the five-stage holistic framework lens was not to look for best practice; rather, it was to enable them to gain a better understanding of their experiences in these important years. Such a holistic approach to reflective practice views the teachers as “whole persons,” and teaching is viewed as multidimensional, including the moral, ethical, and political aspects of our practice.
Reflective Break
What is your understanding of the framework for reflecting on practice.
Although the five stages within the framework are treated separately, they are in fact not isolated, as all are linked, and each stage builds on and influences the other. What is your understanding of this?
Which stage would be most difficult for you to reflect on and why?
Conclusion
This chapter has outlined and discussed how the stories of the seven teachers were elicited through a process of discussion, writing observation, and reflection. The chapter pointed out that the overarching aim of this book is to document through reflective practice the lived experiences of the teachers as they go about their work. Thus, the results can be used to provide various reflective practice strategies that can best sustain early career ESL teachers to not only survive but thrive throughout their teaching careers. The chapter also detailed the specific methodological approach as well as how data were collected and analyzed. Further, it outlined and discussed the value of encouraging ECTs to use the holistic five-stage framework for reflecting on practice as a lens through which to view their experiences. In such a manner, the teachers were able to develop a deeper understanding of their philosophy, principles, and theories as they related to their actual practices and to engage in critical reflection beyond practice, and thus become proactive and confident throughout their teaching careers (Farrell, Reference Farrell2019a; 2019b). The chapter pointed out that at times each teacher could include reflections on more than one stage at a time or comments related to a previous or future stage different from the one in focus, and so it was challenging to separate each of the stages in some instances. However, I report on each stage separately, so that readers can distinguish the dominant issue each teacher focused on within each. Chapters 3–9 provide in-depth results from all the teachers who used the framework outlined above as a lens to reflect on their teaching.
