On teachers' pedagogical mindests and the moral side of teacher thinking and promoting morality in learners. Following Kansanen, P., K. Tirri, M. Meri, L. Krokfors, J. Husu, & R. Jyrhämä (2000). Teachers’ pedagogical thinking. New York: Peter Lang, chapters 4 and 5

1. LINKING VARIOUS APPROACHES:
TEACHERS’ PEDAGOGICAL MIND
SET
and
MORAL PERSPECTIVES IN
TEACHER THINKING
ÇUKUROVA UNIVERSITY ADANA, ELT DEPARTMENT, NOVEMBER 4, 2014
ELT 825 Exploring Teacher Thinking

2. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Overview
 teachers’ professional landscapes
 research on teacher thinking:
 conceptions of teachers
 conceptions of students
 conceptions of context
 knowledge teachers live by
 the matter of the practical
 teachers’ mind sets: where are they set and
what is their setting

3. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Teachers’ professional landscapes
Since the 1990s teachers’ professional
landscapes have changed:
 shift towards team-based pedogogical action
 shaping school-centered curricula has become
a teachers’ task
 shift of administrative power from superiors to
schools
 teachers responsible for classroom practices and
planning
 teachers no more passive curriculum users but
active curriculum makers

4. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Teachers’ professional landscapes
teachers are
“more
responsible for
the totality of
the instructional
process”
(Kansanen et.
al, 2000, p. 36)
practical
capacities
theoretical
capacities
institutional
context
cultural
and social
context
teacher practice
and teacher thinking
are essential for
education delivered
to learners

5. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Research on teacher thinking
 formerly exclusive research focus on teacher
behaviour (external competencies): “What is
effective and good teaching?”
 re-definition of teaching practice (including the
knowledge base, school context, planning,
etc.):
 now focus on teacher thinking as well

6. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Conceptions of teachers
3 phases in the conceptual development in
research on teacher thinking
1. teachers as decision-makers addressing
learning problems through instruction
2. teachers as sense-makers: reflective
professionals who interpret and apply their
extensive knowledge to create meaning for
learners and themselves
3. teachers as constructivists building and
elaborating their personal theories of
teaching and education

7. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Conceptions of teachers
decision-maker sense-maker constructivist
•mechanical
paradigms
•internally
consistent way
of teacher
thinking
•teacher
thinking
directed to
classroom
interaction
•inconsiste
nt and
incomplet
e ways of
thinking
•teacher
thinking
directed to
classroom
and wider
context
•critique of cognitive-constructivist approach: mind regarded as information
processor, not as meaning maker
•shift towards mindful orientation? I.e. focus on teachers’ moral and ethical sense
that “aims at shaping and influencing what students become as persons when
living through pedagogical situations in schools and classrooms” (Kansanen et al.,
2000: 39)

8. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Conceptions of students
Change of the cultural image of schooling:
 students seen as thinkers, planners, decision
makers
 use own cognitive strategies and previous
knowledge base
 make sense of their own studying by
constructing knowledge in interaction with
peers
 active members of the instructional process

9. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Conceptions of context
Change in understanding of context:
 teachers and learners do not act in fixed and
predetermined classroom environment
 teachers and learners construct school context
through mutual negotiation, i.e. context is
practice-based
 context is
 actual: place were actions are taken
 symbolic: symbolises participants’ understanding of
school
 open to change (e.g. virtual classrooms)

10. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Knowledge teachers live by
teacher
knowledge common
knowledge/
common
sense
• acquired in
cultural patterns,
e.g. schooling
specialised/
professional
knowledge:
• acquired in
teacher
education and
teacher
development
teachers use both common sense and specialised
knowledge

11. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Knowledge teachers live by
Relational knowing:
 teaching embedded in social action between teacher
and students; i.e. there is a pedagogical relation
 pedagogical relation depends on teachers’
pedagogical minds
 pedagogical minds are concerned with everything that
contributes to students upbringing from
 an internal perspective (directly related to pedagogical
practice)
 an external perspective (not directly related to pedagogical
practice but addressing educational matters)
 internal and external perspective must be taken into
account to explore teacher thinking

12. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
Knowledge teachers live by
Interrelating cultures:
 cognitive perspectives in research limited:
 ignore the interpersonal side of teacher thinking
 neglect the influence of the social and cultural context
on teacher thinking
 however teachers’ reports on their teaching
include reflection of their own context and culture
because teacher thinking and knowing involve
 attaching meaning to the own context/culture
 acting the mind to deal with the challenges of life with
moral and intellectual strength

13. Teachers’ pedagogical mind set:
The matter of the practical
Is teacher knowledge a product of theoretical reflection or
examination of practice?
Is teacher knowledge conceptualised as episteme or as
phronesis?
episteme
• scientific understanding of
problems through
analytical rationality
• universal, abstract,
invariable
• context-independent
phronesis
• understanding of concrete
cases and complex
situations
• context-related, concrete,
variable
• based on life experience
 how do teachers perceive reality of their teaching practice and
features beyond their teaching practice?
 teacher thinking outcomes are mind-mediated versions of
reality and must be interpreted

14. Teachers’ pedagogical minds:
Where are they set and what are
their settings?
Teachers’ pedagogical thinking, i.e. their
pedagogical minds, are linked to perception-based
and subjective knowledge
instead of relying on ready-made theories
researchers have to ask:
•What concrete situations do teachers perceive?
•What experiences do they have?
•What plans do they intend to execute?
•How do they reflect upon consequences?

15. Teachers’ pedagogical minds:
Where are they set and what are
their settings?
Two complementary conceptualisations of the
teachers’ minds: mindset refers to…
… a rather stable mental
attitude towards perceiving
objects and events.
It informs about
• what is perceived
• the content of teacher
thinking
• what teachers treat as
focal.
… an integrative and
interrelated context in
teachers’ thinking.
It informs about
• how teacher thinking
occurs
• how teachers employ
reasoning
• the framework of mental
constructs (e.g. beliefs,
assumptions) that attach
meaning to professional
knowledge.

16. Moral perspectives in teacher
thinking
Overview
 Moral dimension of teaching
 Teachers’ professional morality
 Promoting moral learning in students

17. Moral dimension of teaching
 1990s: conceptualising of moral dimension of
teacher thinking:
 morality  professional ethos of teachers
 teacher’s decision-making can be interpreted
from ethical point of view (moral message)

18. Moral dimension of teaching
 morality is manifested in
 formal curricula (e.g. religious schools)
 within subject curricula
 moral practices (classroom rules, ceremonies,
classroom practices, personal qualities of
teachers)
 morality hidden but present in teaching and
classroom interaction
 teachers good at moral reasoning and giving just
solutions; however, responsible judgements to
solve moral dilemmas require strategies, i.e.
teachers’ professional morality

19. Teachers’ professional morality
Oser (1991): 3 types of morality
normative morality
• reasoning about
hypothetical
actions in
decision-making
(with reference
to moral norms)
• insufficient to
address
concrete
situations
situational
morality
• decision-making
in real-life
situations
• decision-making
influenced by
the situational
context (social,
psychological,
political,
economic
aspects)
professional
morality
• connected to
functional,
professional,
seemingly
nonmoral acting
• e.g. giving poor
marks to a
student may
conflict with
justice, caring
and truthfulness
(Vartiainen,
2007: 685)

20. Teachers’ professional morality
Teachers’ decision-making strategies in solving
dilemmas: 5 orientations
• not facing the problem
• refusing responsibility avoiding orientation
• accepting responsibility
• no own decision; delegating to, e.g., principal
delegating
orientation
• accepting responsibility and acting, often in authoritarian manner
• teacher assumes own expertise
single-handed
decision making
• accepting responsibility and acting
• explaining how justice, caring and truthfulness have been balanced
Discourse I
(incomplete
discourse)
• accepting responsibility and acting by involving students
(parents, etc.)
• teacher assumes others are capable of balancing justice,
caring and truthfulness
Discourse II
(complete
discourse)

21. Promoting moral learning in
students
 by setting learning goals (e.g. Golden Rule) in
national or school curricula
 by negotiating rules collaboratively
 by delivering moral messages in an unplanned
manner, i.e. in daily teaching
 by addressing children’s needs: to be loved, to
be led, to be vulnerable, to make sense, to
please adults, to have hope, to know truth, to
be known, to be safe, to make one’s mark

22. Promoting moral learning in
students:
1. Values clarification
Values clarification focuses on process of valuing:
 students are encouraged to:
1. choose freely among alternatives
2. prize and affirm their values
3. act upon chosen values consistently
 values are personal, not right or wrong
 clarifying values is prerequisite for responsible
judgements
 does not provide cognitive aspects of ethical
requiring
 promotes self-regarding reasoning and
subjectivism

23. Promoting moral learning in
students:
2. Applied Kohlberg
Kohlberg’s stages of moral development (Crain,
1985) universal
principles
social contract
orientation
maintaining the social
order
interpersonal relationships
self-interest orientation
obedience and punishment orientation

24. Promoting moral learning in
students:
2. Applied Kohlberg
Procedure in ‘Applied Kohlberg’:
1. teacher presents dilemma; discussion in
class; students propose judgement
2. teacher presents moral judgement that is one
level higher than students’ judgement
 effective means of inducing moral change
 use of real-life dilemmas promising

25. Promoting moral learning in
students:
3. Discourse ethics
Presuppositions in discourse ethics:
 norms are established intersubjectively, i.e. in
social action
 universalisation: a norm is valid if all participants
know the consequences of a norm, the
consequences meet their interests and the
consequences are preferred to known
alternatives
 principle of discourse ethics: a norm is valid if all
participants have approved it in a practical
discourse

26. Promoting moral learning in
students:
3. Discourse ethics
moral discourse in educational practice has to
consider (cf. Fritzén & Tapola, 2008):
 solution to a given problem is justified in
discourse, i.e. it is an outcome of negotiating
 all participants are able to engage
 consequences, also of alternative solutions,
are known
 teacher trusts students to be able to participate
in moral discourse

27. References
 Crain, W.C. (1985). Theories of Development. New York:
Prentice-Hall.
 Fritzén, L. & A. Tapola (2008). Habermas’s discourse ethics in
educational practice. SIG 13 Symposium Florina Greece.
Draft version. Retrieved October 28. 2014 from:
http://www.eled.uowm.gr/sig13/fulltexts/Paper3.pdf
 Kansanen, P., K. Tirri, M. Meri, L. Krokfors, J. Husu, & R.
Jyrhämä (2000). Teachers’ pedagogical thinking. New York:
Peter Lang.
 Oser, F.K. (1991). Professional morality: A discourse
approach. In Kurtines, W.M. & J.L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook
of moral behavior and development. Volume 2: Research (pp.
191-228). Hillsday: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 Vartiainen, T. (2007). Moral conflicts in teaching project work:
a job burdened by role strains. Communication of the
Assosiation for Information Systems 20, 681-711.