Unveiling professional development: A critical review of stage models

In research across professions, the development of professional skill traditionally was seen as a process of accumulation of knowledge and skills, promoted by practical experience. More recently, this view has been modified to incorporate skillful know-how that is progressively acquired by passing through developmental stages, such as novice, competent, and expert. The authors of this article critically review contemporary stage models that are typically applied across professions. Their principal critique is that a focus on stages veils or conceals more fundamental aspects of professional skill development. On the basis of their critique, the authors propose an alternative model that builds on the strengths of previous models while seeking to overcome their main limitations. Finally, the authors outline the implications of their alternative model for professional education, workplace practices, and research on professional development

Physiotherapists' experiences of physiotherapy interventions in scientific physiotherapy publications focusing on interventions for children with cerebral palsy: a qualitative phenomenographic approach

Background: Physiotherapy research concerning interventions for children with CP is often focused on collecting evidence of the superiority of particular therapeutic methods or treatment modalities. Articulating and documenting the use of theory, instrumentation and research design and the assumptions underlying physiotherapy research interventions are important. Physiotherapy interventions focusing on children with Cerebral Palsy should, according to the literature, be based on a functional and environmental perspective with task-specific functional activity, motor learning processes and Family-Centred Service i.e. to enhance motor ability and improve capacity so that the child can perform the tasks necessary to participate actively in everyday life. Thus, it is important to coordinate the norms and values of the physiotherapist with those of the family and child. The aim of this study was to describe how physiotherapists' experiences physiotherapy interventions for children with CP in scientific physiotherapy publications written by physiotherapists. Methods: A qualitative phenomenographic approach was used. Twenty-one scientific articles, found in PubMed, strategically chosen according to year of publication (2001-2009), modality, journals and country, were investigated. Results: Three qualitatively different descriptive categories were identified: A: Making it possible a functional-based intervention based on the biopsychosocial health paradigm, and the role of the physiotherapist as collaborative, interacting with the child and family in goal setting, intervention planning and evaluation, B: Making it work an impairment-based intervention built on a mixed health paradigm (biomedical and biopsychosocial), and the role of the physiotherapist as a coach, leading the goal setting, intervention planning and evaluation and instructing family members to carry out physiotherapist directed orders, and; C: Making it normal an impairment-based intervention built on a biomedical health paradigm, and the role of the physiotherapist as an authoritative expert who determine goals, intervention planning and evaluation. Conclusions: Different paradigms of health and disability lead to different approaches to physiotherapy which influence the whole intervention process regarding strategies for the assessment and treatment, all of which influence Family-Centred Service and the child's motor learning strategies. The results may deepen physiotherapists' understanding of how different paradigms of health influence the way in which various physiotherapy approaches in research seek to solve the challenge of CP

Teaching the history threshold learning outcomes to first-year students

Stakeholder ownership and implementation are crucial when applying the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) to the development of curriculum. Threshold Learning Outcomes (TLOs) are a case in point. While they might seem to be triumphs of managerialism over pedagogy, we argue that they can be used to build lecturers’ deep engagement with the teaching of their discipline and thus foster sustainable change. By extending the professional use of TLOs, beyond the stages of agreement, establishment and early dissemination, to the point of implementation, we offer a framework for how to elicit collegial conversations to improve teaching and learning practice in history. First, we combine ‘Decoding the Disciplines’ methods developed by historians at Indiana University. Second, we add key principles of first-year pedagogy, associated with Sally Kift. Third, we link to Threshold Learning Outcomes. The framework is supplemented by a good practice guide that translates our theoretical model into practical strategies in teaching and assessment

Pedagogical sensemaking or “doing school”: In well-designed workshop sessions, facilitation makes the difference

Although physics education researchers often use workshops to promote instructional change in higher education, little research has been done to investigate workshop design. Initial evidence suggests that many workshop sessions focus primarily on raising faculty’s awareness of research-based instructional strategies, a fairly straightforward goal that has been largely met. However, increasing faculty’s awareness of existing strategies alone has somewhat limited benefits. We argue that workshop leaders should also aim to cultivate faculty’s ability and motivation to engage in pedagogical sensemaking, i.e., the pursuit of robust pedagogical logic based on observations and interpretations of classroom events. This goal is likely more challenging to achieve, and thus presents a greater need for research. In this paper, we pursue in situ, qualitative analysis of two parallel workshop sessions that seem to have the potential to support ambitious outcomes. We demonstrate how faculty may engage in aspects of pedagogical sensemaking, such as using observations of student behavior to support their arguments. We also show how faculty may instead seem to engage in interactions reminiscent of students “doing school,” such as evaluating instruction based on “correctness” alone. We also show how differences in workshop facilitation seemed to contribute to faculty engaging in pedagogical sensemaking in one session only. These differences include (i) strictly enforcing session rules versus gently navigating faculty’s incoming expectations, (ii) highlighting the workshop leaders’ expertise versus working to minimize power differentials, and (iii) emphasizing the benefits of adoption of a prescribed strategy versus encouraging faculty to reason about possible adaptations. We consider the implications of this analysis for future research and workshop design