Download - Developing a Maturity Model Concept for Educators of Adults

V.S. TOWNE WORK IN PROGRESS – DESCRIPTION OF A MATURITY MODEL CONCEPT of 10

Describing professional development

Development models – staged and otherwise

Describing developmental stages of educators is not a novel concept. There are varieties

of well-documented constructs that serve as models from a variety of perspectives. Dall’Alba

and Sandberg (2006) provide a review and critique of staged based models such as Dreyfus &

Dreyfus (1986) that depict developmental stages within a profession as linear progressions

through time that build on each other as unable to explain how one moves through the stages or

what factors affect movement. Dall’Alba and Sandberg provide an alternative view that

development is multidimensional with a horizontal axis of skill progression and a vertical axis

representing an embodied understanding of practice that accounts for differing trajectories of

practitioners with equivalent educational backgrounds and work opportunities across time.

Taxonomies

Just as there are taxonomies describing a common framework for the development of

learners, such as Bloom’s (1956), Biggs and Collis (1982) Structure of Observed Learning

Outcomes (SOLO) and Harrow’s (1972) and Simpson’s (1972) psychomotor classifications,

there are taxonomies that describe professional development for many professions, and educators

of adults (EA) come from all professions and occupations. For example, Brown and Ferrill

(2009) used the taxonomy of learning as a frame to identify and describe professional

development goals in the context of pharmaceutical education. Their taxonomy model consists

of three domains with five progressive levels within each as illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Brown and Ferrill's (2009) Taxonomy of Professionalism– INSERT HERE

V. S. Towne - Work in progress


In contrast, Kelley, Stanke, Rabi, Kuba, & Janke (2011), also describing a pharmacy subject

matter expert (SME), provide a rating scale derivation for their five domain taxonomy, as shown

in figure 2, that places “educator” as the highest performance descriptor. As with the majority of

taxonomies and models of professional development, there is no guidance for how to make the

journey from level 1 to level 5, or from Novice to Educator.

Christie (2012) takes action on Dall’Alba and Sandberg’s criticism of staged

development models by combining the Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1980) five-stage skill development

model with Glaser’s (1983) behavioral approach and Bloom et al.’s (1956) taxonomy of

cognitive learning objectives to create an taxonomy of interpersonal skills learning (Figure 3).

Although this taxonomy does not provide the specifics of how to travel from one stage to

another, it does provide insight on how others might determine when you have arrived at a

waystation.

Maturity models

Maturity models are not new concepts. Kolhegger, Maier and Thalmann (2009) identified

74 maturity models in the context of information systems and computer science described as “the

tip of an iceberg” that includes models from biology, sociology and psychology domains.

Kolhegger, et al, (2009) identified three sub-categories of maturity models labled as persons,

objects and social systems and selected five studies from each (plus one) to form the sample

corpus of their study. Following a structured content analysis of the 16 maturity models,

Kolhegger et al. provide us with a definition that “a maturity model conceptually represents

phases of increasing quantitative or qualitative capability changes of a maturing element in order

to assess its advances with respect to defined focus areas” (p. 59). Additionally, their study

Figure 2 Kelley, et al. (2011) Table 2– INSERT HERE

Figure 3 Christie (2012) Table 1 – INSERT HERE



documents the aspects of a maturity model that can form the basis for a design checklist. Further

research turned up two “person-focused” maturity models for post-secondary educators.

Chambers (2013) presents the results of a year-long study to define mentor competencies

for physical education teacher education programs which resulted in what is described as a

Capability Maturity Model for Mentor Teachers (CM3T). CM3T is used to identify the maturity

level of a mentor and describe (or prescribe) training that could lead to achieving the next mentor

maturity level. CM3T describes maturity as a function of time and capabilities that arise over

time in the profession, but fails to account for those who mature faster in terms of time or more

robustly in terms of capabilities. It does not account for those who enter the practice later in life

and exhibit certain maturities in advance of the normative timeline.

Chen, Kuo and Chen (2011) describe the potential development of a Teaching Capability

Maturity Model (T-CMM) to manage and improve teaching quality. This preliminary paper

identifies several relevant questions to be answered before flesh can be put on the skeleton of

their model, including whether common practices even exist for teachers in post-secondary

schools. They describe teachers as being domain independent and free to “carve their own

niches in developing and conducting their course teaching” (p.4) while acknowledging that many

teachers received no training as teachers prior to arrrival. Chen, Kuo and Chen demonstrate

understanding of the CMM and CIMM process but not an understanding that there is a body of

educational methods and strategies that exist independantly of the individual subject matter

expert who happens to have teaching duties.

What is needed is a maturity model that speaks to the development of the educator of

adults, regardless of discipline, topic or subject.



What makes a mature educator of Adults?

Teacher/teaching characteristics

Identity component as an educator/teacher and professional development participation

[rework] A profession is based on systematic, scientific knowledge with the preliminary

development of professional skills, meaning those used by a professional in a practice, obtained

through participation in higher education programs (Dall'Alba & Sandberg, 2006; Moore, 2008).

Professional knowledge refers to the particular knowledge required for a professional to function

effectively within a specified practice (Reichenberg, Kleeman, & Sagee, 2012). “Practice is . . .

a dynamic flow produced and reproduced by professionals” (Dall'Alba & Sandberg, 2006, p.

385) and is a consequence of situated social context (Knight, Tait, & Yorke, 2006). “A

practitioner’s identity is central to understanding the nature of his or her practice and, thus, to the

work of continuing professional development” (Dirkx, 2003 as cited by Rose, Jeris, & Smith,

2005, p. 1310).

Developing a professional identity as an AE is an inverted process with on-the-job

training coming before learning theory or methods. Usually, a professional identity is developed

when a background of history, theory and method is acquired through formal education that is

then followed by practice (Rose, Jeris, & Smith, 2005). Professional identity as an

educator/teacher of adults, an AE, means seeing one’s self as a teacher of adults and being

recognized as a teacher of adults within a specific area or discipline by others. This larger

professional identity includes sub-identities that conflict and align within the contexts of

traditions and stereotypes and the ever-changing landscape of social interactions with peers,

other professionals and the larger community. Although professional identity is something that



exists internally, it guides an individual’s explicit actions (Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004;

Brownell & Tanner, 2012; Gresalfi & Cobb, 2011; Rose, Jeris, & Smith, 2005).

In higher education and the professional working world, socialization into a specific

discipline’s culture begins in graduate school when the values of a professional discipline are

learned along with what is needed to prosper in that prospective professional culture (Brownell

& Tanner, 2012; Finkelstein, 2014). Teaching assistant roles, such as those found in doctoral

and post-doctoral programs usually do not provide training for the professional AE role. Most

departments and disciplines focus on the development of subject matter expertise and research

skills to the exclusion of teaching skills and knowledge (Bouwma-Gearhart, 2012; Brownell &

Tanner, 2012; Luzeckyj & Badger, 2008).

Faculty development used to be focused on the professional growth of faculty within

their respective disciplines. Since the 1980s, faculty development has increasingly focused on

the development of teaching expertise, which is now regarded as central to effective teaching.

This is reflected in the critical attention given to Boyer’s (1990) model of scholarship that

promotes the concept that faculty development should include what Boyer dubbed the

“scholarship of teaching” (Behar-Horenstein, Zafar, & Roberts, 2012; Bouwma-Gearhart, 2012;

Brancato, 2003; Brody & Hadar, 2011; Economos, 2014; Feixas & Zellweger, 2010; Finkelstein,

2014; Gusky, 2003; Luzeckyj & Badger, 2008; Reichenberg, Kleeman, & Sagee, 2012).

Thinking about one’s teaching knowledge and examining one’s beliefs about teaching and

learning have an effect on the educator’s choice of content as well as teaching method. This kind

of thinking contributes to the ability to make changes in teaching behavior because it involves

the participants as whole persons. It is this kind of reflective practice that opens up new ways of

thinking about teaching and can be transformative where it changes previously held ideas and



beliefs about teaching and learning, and sets the stage for lifelong learning as an adult educator

(Belzer, 2003; Bouwma-Gearhart, 2012; Brancato, 2003; Brody & Hadar, 2011; Cranton &

King, 2003; Economos, 2014; Feixas & Zellweger, 2010; Moore, 2008; Rose, Jeris, & Smith,

2005; Smith & Gillespie, 2007).

It has been noted that there is a tension between having expertise in a subject matter

discipline and being a novice as a teacher/educator (Bouwma-Gearhart, 2012; Brancato, 2003;

Brody & Hadar, 2011; Economos, 2014; Gresalfi & Cobb, 2011; Luzeckyj & Badger, 2008;

Reichenberg, Kleeman, & Sagee, 2012). That tension is eased by transitioning from an exclusive

SME identity to one that includes an educator/teacher identity.

Many studies have looked at the motivation for teaching in the context of K-12

education. There is also a rich history of studies related to teaching behavior and teaching

concepts that look at self-efficacy, teaching efficacy and development of a professional teaching

identity – again mostly focused on K-12 educators or the education and training of professionals

for that context. Fewer studies have focused on such issues for educators of adults in formal and

nonformal post-secondary context [cite]. Studies about participation in professional

development learning activities related to educator/teacher skills and knowledge generally

involved participants in voluntary learning activities [cite]. No studies were found that looked at

professional identity as a predictor of participation in professional development learning

activities by adult educators with no background or training in adult education theories and

methods.

A study designed to explore whether a professional identity that includes a

teacher/educator component is related to, or a predictor of, participation in professional

development learning activities by adult educators with no formal background or training in



adult education theories or method would address this gap and could also illuminate the

relationship of these factors to maturity as an adult educator. Appendix X is a proposed study

designed to collect information across the spectrum of post-secondary educators of adults with

no formal background or training in adult education theories or method in two areas: the

existence of a teacher/educator component of professional identity, and the history of

participation in learning activities focused on development of teacher/educator skills and

knowledge.

Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)

An articulated teaching and learning philosophy

Habits of reflection on action and reflection in action

Learner centeredness

Ethics

Possible collaborative study on ethics

What might a maturity model for educators look like?



References – WORKING SOURCE LIST Behar‐Horenstein, L. S., Zafar, M. A., & Roberts, K. W. (2012). Impact of faculty development on physical

therapy professors' beliefs. The Journal of Faculty Development, 37‐46. Retrieved March 2014

Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers' professional

identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 107‐128. Retrieved April 2014, from

http://eitonline.eit.ac.nz/pluginfile.php/118041/mod_resource/content/0/ProfessionalIdentity_

2_.pdf

Belzer, A. (2003). Toward broadening the definition of impact in professional development for ABE

Practitioners. Adult Basic Education, 13(1), 44‐59. Retrieved February 2014

Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York, NY:

Academic Press.

Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of

educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay Co Inc.

Bouwma‐Gearhart, J. (2012). Research university STEM faculty members' motivation to engage in

teaching professional development: Building the choir through an appeal to extrinsic motivation

and ego. Jouranl of Science Education and Technology, 21(5), 558‐570. doi:10.1007/s10956‐011‐

9346‐8

Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie

Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Retrieved April 2014, from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED326149.pdf

Brancato, V. C. (2003). Professional development in higher education. New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, Summer(98), 59‐65. Retrieved March 2014

Brody, D., & Hadar, L. (2011). "I speak prose and I now know it." Personal development trajectories

among teacher educators in a professional development community. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 27, 1223‐1234. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.002

Brown, D., & Ferrill, M. J. (2009). The taxonomy of professionalism: Reframing the academic pursuit of

professional development. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(4), 1‐10.

Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time,

incentives, and . . .tensions with professional identity? CBE‐‐Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339‐

346. doi:10.1187/cbe.12‐09‐0163

Chambers, F. C., Herold, F., McFlynn, P., Brennan, D., & Armour, K. (2013). Developing Effective Mentor

Pedagogies to Support Pre‐service Teacher Learning on Teaching Practice (mentor‐ped): A

capability maturity model for mentor teachers [CM3T]. University College Cork, Ireland. Cork,

Ireland: Standing Conference on Teacher Education North and South (SCoTENS). Retrieved from

http://scotens.org/wp‐content/uploads/FinalReport.pdf



Chen, C. Y., Kuo, C. Y., & Chen, P. C. (2011). The Teaching Capability Maturity Model for Teachers in.

2011 International Conference on Frontiers in Education: Computer Science and Computer

Engineering (FECS’11) (p. 7). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: World Academy of Science.org. Retrieved

from http://worldcomp‐proceedings.com/proc/p2011/FEC4512.pdf

Christie, N. V. (2012). An Interpersonal Skills Learning Taxonomy for Program Evaluation Instructors.

Journal of Public Affairs Education, 18(4), 739‐756. Retrieved from

http://m.naspaa.org/JPAEmessenger/Article/VOL18‐4/08_Christie.pdf

Cranton, P., & King, K. P. (2003). Transformative learning as a professional development goal. New

Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 98, 31‐37.

Cullen, J. B. (1983). An occupational taxonomy by professional characteristics: Implications for research.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22(3), 257‐267. doi:10.1016/0001‐8791(83)90011‐8

Dall'Alba, G., & Sandberg, J. (2006). Unveilling professional development: A critical review of stage

models. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 383‐412. Retrieved February 2014

Dreyfus, S. E., & Dreyfus, H. L. (1980). A five‐stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill

acquisition. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.

Dreyfus, S. E., & Dreyfus, H. L. (1986). Mind over machine: The poser of human intuition and expertise in

the era of the computer. New York, NY: Free Press.

Economos, J. (2014). The squeaky wheel needs the grease: Perceptions of teaching and learning in

graduate education. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 14(2), 5‐19. Retrieved April 2014, from

http://uncw.edu/cte/ET/articles/Vol14_1/Volume1401.pdf#page=10

Feixas, M., & Zellweger, F. (2010). Faculty development in context: Changing learning cultures in higher

education. In U. Ehlers, & D. Schneckenberg (Eds.), Changing Cultures in Higher Education (pp.

85‐102). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978‐3‐642‐03582‐1_8

Finkelstein, M. (2014). The balance between teaching and research in the work life of American

academics. In Teaching and Research in Contemporary Higher Education (pp. 299‐318).

Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978‐94‐007‐6830‐7_16

Glaser, S. R. (1983). Interpersonal communication instruction: A behaviorial competency approach.

Communication Education, 32, 221‐225.

Gusky, T. R. (2003). The characteristics of effective professional development: A synthesis of lists. Annual

Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, (p. 26). Chicago. Retrieved April

2014, from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED478380.pdf

Harrow, A. (1972). A taxonomy of psychomotor domain: A guide for developing behavorial objectives.

New York, NY: David McKay Co. Inc.

Kelley, K. A., Stanke, L. D., Rabi, S. M., Kuba, S. E., & Janke, K. K. (2011). Cross‐validation of an Instrument

for measuring professionalism behaviors. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75(9),

1‐10.



Knight, P., Tait, J., & Yorke, M. (2006). The professional learning of teachers in higher education. Studies

in higher education, 31(03), 319‐339. Retrieved April 2014, from

http://www.open.ac.uk/iet/main/files/iet‐web/file/ecms/web‐

content/Studies_prof_learning_paper_final1.pdf

Kohlegger, M., Maier, R., & Thalmann, S. (2009). Understanding maturity models: Results of a structured

content analysis. n.a. Retrieved from

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/215312013_Understanding_Maturity_Models._Resul

ts_of_a_Structured_Content_Analysis/file/d912f505ff99d85e73.pdf

Luzeckyj, A., & Badger, L. (2008). Literature review for preparing Academics to teach in higher education

(PATHE). Unpublished research report, Flinders University, University of South Australia & Bond

University, Adelaide, Australia. Retrieved April 2014, from

http://flinders.edu.au/pathe/PATHE_Project_LitReview.pdf

Moore, D. M. (2008). Establishing ownership: How agricultural education teachers influenced the

planning of their continuing professional education experiences. (Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell

University). Retrieved February 2014, from

http://www.ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/11084/1/D.%20Moore%20Complete%20D

oc%20July%207.pdf

Reichenberg, R., Kleeman, S., & Sagee, R. (2012). The professional development of teacher educators in

the context of the school of professional development at the MOFET Institute. In M. Ben‐Peretz,

S. Kleeman, R. Reichenberg, & S. Shimoni (Eds.), Teacher educators as an evolving profession

(pp. 105‐133). Plymouth, United Kingdom: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Retrieved April 2014

Rose, A. D., Jeris, L., & Smith, R. (2005, June). Is adult education a calling? Shaping identity and practice

in steel mill learning centers. Teachers College Record, 107(6), 1305‐1334. Retrieved February

2014

Saulnier, B. M., Landry, J. P., Longnecker, H. E., & Wagner, T. A. (2008). From teaching to learning:

Learner‐centered teaching and assessment in information systems education. Journal of

Information Systems Education, 19(2), 169‐174.

Simpson, E. J. (1972). The classification of educational objectives in the psychomotor domain.

Washington, D.C.: Gryphon House.

Smith, C., & Gillespie, M. (2007). Research on professional development and teacher change:

Implications for adult basic education. Review of Adult Learning and Literacy, 7, 205‐244.

Retrieved February 2014, from http://lerenvandocenten.nl/files/sites/default/files/smith‐

gillespie‐07.pdf
