Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs)
After this session, students will be able to:
- Analyse the key dimensions of teacher professionalism (e.g., ethical standards, autonomy, ongoing learning) as they are conceptualised in at least two different national/international frameworks.
- Compare and contrast local (e.g., Hong Kong/UK/US) definitions of professional conduct with those from an international context (e.g., OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey [TALIS] indicators, UNESCO recommendations).
- Critique hidden assumptions in dominant professionalism discourses (e.g., the "ideal teacher" construct, performativity vs. autonomy).
- Construct a well‑reasoned argument for how teacher professionalism should be re‑imagined in a globalised, culturally diverse classroom.
- Synthesise peer perspectives and scholarly sources into a shared, inquiry‑driven understanding of professionalism's tensions and possibilities.
Alignment: ILOs 1–3 reflect analysis and evaluation (Bloom's Taxonomy); ILOs 4–5 involve creation and synthesis of collaborative inquiry. The entire set is tightly linked to the Critical Inquiry Seminar pedagogy, which demands questioning, comparing, and debating.
Pre-Class Preparation
The Critical Inquiry Seminar model does not require pre‑class reading, but a short pre‑reading in the previous week is recommended to ensure baseline knowledge.
- Reading: Whitty, G. (2006). "Teacher professionalism in a new era." General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland. (4 pages) – focusing on the shift from "old" to "new" professionalism.
- Guiding question (posted on discussion board): "Which aspect of teacher professionalism in your own experience most needs re‑examination? Bring one example to class."
Teaching & Learning Activities
Introduction (15 minutes) – Critical Inquiry Hook
| Time | Activity | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|
| 0–5 | Provocative Opening: Display two headlines: "Teachers should be accountable to measurable outcomes" vs. "Professionalism is about teacher autonomy and trust." Ask students to stand on one side of the room representing their initial stance. | Critical Inquiry: Polarising issue forces students to surface assumptions. |
| 5–10 | Think‑Pair‑Share: In pairs, students discuss why they chose that side. Teacher circulates, noting key points of tension. | Encourages articulation of pre‑existing beliefs. |
| 10–15 | Share whole‑class – teacher maps emerging themes on board (e.g., "accountability vs. trust", "local vs. global standards"). | Sets the inquiry agenda for the session. |
🔧 Tool: Poll for Initial Stance
Use Mentimeter to create a digital poll for visualising the class split:
- Go to Mentimeter.com and create a free account
- Click "New presentation" and select "Scales" question type
- Enter the question: "Should teacher professionalism be globally standardised?"
- Set 5 options: ① Strongly yes – ② Somewhat yes – ③ Neutral – ④ Somewhat no – ⑤ Strongly no
- Display results as a bar chart to stimulate discussion
- Share the voting code with students via projector
Purpose: Quickly visualise diverse perspectives and create an immediate hook for critical inquiry.
Development Activities (65 minutes)
Activity 1: Comparative Document Analysis (20 min)
Students are divided into 6 groups of 5. Each group receives two documents (print or digital):
- Document A: Local teaching council's Code of Conduct (e.g., Hong Kong's "Code for the Education Profession")
- Document B: Extract from OECD's TALIS 2018 report on professionalism indicators (e.g., autonomy, collaborative culture, professional development)
Task: Use a Venn diagram (on A3 paper) to identify similarities, differences, and contradictions between the two frameworks.
Critical Inquiry prompts:
- What assumptions about "good teaching" underlie each document?
- Whose interests are served by these definitions?
- Are there any voices missing?
| Time | Activity | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|
| 15–20 | Initial reading and annotation. | Independent analysis – builds evidence base. |
| 20–35 | Group discussion and diagram creation. | Collaborative inquiry – students challenge each other's interpretations. |
Activity 2: Structured Debate (25 min)
- Each group presents one key "contradiction" they discovered (2 min per group).
- Teacher facilitates a whole‑class debate around the question: "Should teacher professionalism be globally standardised or locally determined?"
- Two "expert panels" (3 students each) are volunteer‑assigned to argue for and against standardisation, using evidence from the documents and their own experiences.
- Remaining students act as "critical jury" – they note persuasive points and later vote.
| Time | Activity | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|
| 35–40 | Group presentations. | Sharing diverse findings. |
| 40–55 | Panel debate + jury observations. | Critical Inquiry – argumentation, respectful disagreement, evidence use. |
| 55–60 | Vote and brief reflection: "What new questions do you have?" | Metacognitive closure of inquiry. |
🔧 Tool: Interactive Debate with Kahoot
Use Kahoot! to collect jury votes and reflect on the debate:
- Create a free account at Kahoot.com
- Select "Survey" mode (not quiz mode)
- Add questions:
- "Which panel presented more convincing evidence?"
- "Has your initial position changed?" (Yes/No/Partially)
- "What new question do you now have about professionalism?"
- Launch the survey and display the game PIN on the projector
- Students join via kahoot.it on their devices
- Review aggregate results to guide closing discussion
Learning Objective: Encourage metacognitive reflection on how evidence shifts perspectives.
Activity 3: Collaborative Synthesis (20 min)
In the same groups, students co‑create a "Principled Framework for Teacher Professionalism in a Globalised World" (poster or digital slide). They must incorporate:
- At least two dimensions from the local doc
- At least two from the international doc
- One idea that challenges both (e.g., "cultural responsiveness as a core component")
Template provided: Core principles | Rationale | Examples from practice
| Time | Activity | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|
| 60–70 | Group work on framework. | Creation and synthesis – higher‑order thinking. |
| 70–80 | Gallery walk: groups view others' frameworks and leave sticky‑note questions/comments. | Peer critique – further inquiry. |
🔧 Tool: Digital Gallery Walk with Padlet
Use Padlet for a digital gallery walk where students can post frameworks and comment:
- Create a free Padlet account
- Choose "Gallery" layout for visual framework display
- Set title: "Frameworks for Teacher Professionalism in a Globalised World"
- Enable commenting and reactions
- Each group uploads their framework (photo or digital slide)
- Groups navigate to view other frameworks and leave comments using the guiding questions
- Share the Padlet link via QR code or shortened URL
Learning Objective: Foster peer learning through constructive critique and identification of common themes.
Synthesis & Closure (10 minutes)
| Time | Activity | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|
| 80–85 | Exit Ticket: "One assumption about professionalism that I now question is… because…" | Formative check on critical thinking shift. |
| 85–90 | Teacher summarises key tensions uncovered; links to next session's topic (e.g., teacher identity in multicultural classrooms). | Preview and agenda setting for continued inquiry. |
🔧 Tool: Exit Ticket with Google Forms
Collect reflective exit tickets digitally using Google Forms:
- Go to Google Forms and create a new form
- Title: "Exit Ticket: Teacher Professionalism"
- Add a short answer question: "One assumption about professionalism that I now question is..."
- Add a second short answer: "...because..."
- Optional: Add a scale question (1-5): "How much did this session challenge your thinking?"
- Set responses to be anonymous or identifiable (based on your assessment needs)
- Share the link via QR code displayed on screen
- Review responses after class to inform next session
Learning Objective: Capture individual conceptual shifts for formative assessment and instructional adjustment.
Assessment Methods
Formative Assessment (During Class)
| Method | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|
| Observations: Teacher notes depth of group discussion, use of evidence, and ability to challenge assumptions. | Critical Inquiry values quality of questioning. |
| Exit Ticket: One question/assumption challenge – tickets are reviewed after class to gauge conceptual shifts. | Directly assesses ILO 3 (critique) and ILO 5 (synthesis). |
| Peer review on gallery walk (sticky‑note comments) – students assess each other's frameworks for depth and balance. | Encourages critical reading of peers' reasoning. |
Summative Assessment (Post‑session)
Individual Reflective Essay (due one week later, 800–1000 words):
Prompt: "Drawing on the class activity and at least three scholarly sources, argue how teacher professionalism should be both locally rooted and globally informed. Use specific examples from the documents we analysed."
Rubric (weighted 40% analysis, 30% argumentation, 20% critical reflection, 10% use of peer perspectives):
| Criterion | Excellent | Good | Developing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Analysis of contexts | Compares local & int'l with nuance, identifies hidden assumptions | Clear comparison with some critical insight | Descriptive, minimal critique |
| Argument construction | Coherent, evidence‑based, considers counterarguments | Logical with evidence | Weak evidence or structure |
| Reflection on own inquiry | Explicitly mentions how own thinking changed | Some reflection | Little or no reflection |
Constructive Alignment Matrix
| Learning Outcome | Teaching Activity | Assessment Method | Pedagogy Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| ILO1: Analyse dimensions of professionalism | Comparative document analysis with Venn diagram | Observation of group work; exit ticket mentions specific dimensions | Critical Inquiry – breaking down two texts reveals underlying assumptions. |
| ILO2: Compare local & international contexts | Document analysis + gallery walk | Summative essay requires explicit comparison | Inquiry‑driven comparison without prescribed answer. |
| ILO3: Critique hidden assumptions | Debate and exit ticket | Exit ticket captures one assumption challenged | Central to Critical Inquiry – questioning taken‑for‑granted ideas. |
| ILO4: Construct an argument for re‑imagined professionalism | Group framework creation + gallery walk | Summative essay (argument) | Creation of framework is a collaborative inquiry product. |
| ILO5: Synthesise peer perspectives | Gallery walk comments, whole‑class debate | Summative essay (must integrate peer ideas) | Peer perspectives are treated as evidence to be evaluated. |
Required Resources & Technology
Documents
- Local Code of Conduct (e.g., from Education Bureau/Teaching Council)
- OECD (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I) – excerpt on professionalism indicators (pp. 170–175)
Materials
- A3 paper / markers for Venn diagrams
- Sticky notes for gallery walk
- Projector/slides with debate prompts and templates
Technology
- LMS (Moodle/Canvas) for posting readings and essay submission
- Optional: Padlet for real‑time sharing of "one new question" during closure
📚 Document Access
Access OECD TALIS reports:
- Visit the OECD TALIS website
- Navigate to "TALIS 2018 Results"
- Download Volume I (PDF available for free)
- Extract pages 170-175 focusing on professionalism indicators
- Print or share digitally with students
Purpose: Provide internationally comparable data on teacher professionalism for critical analysis.
Differentiation & Inclusivity
Multiple Entry Points
- Provide bullet‑point summaries of the two documents for students who need scaffolding.
- Offer a choice in the debate role: speaker, evidence‑gatherer, or critical observer.
Extension for Advanced Learners
- Assign a third document (e.g., a scholarly article critiquing professionalism from a post‑colonial perspective) and ask them to incorporate it into group framework.
Accessibility
- Large‑print versions of documents.
- Captioned videos if any (none used here).
- Allow oral presentation of group framework instead of written for students with language difficulties.
Cultural Responsiveness
- Acknowledge that "professionalism" may carry different values in different cultural contexts – groups are encouraged to reflect their own cultural backgrounds.
Reflection & Improvement
Success Indicators (Specific to Critical Inquiry)
- Number of students who change their initial stance after the debate (measured by re‑poll or exit ticket).
- Quality of questions on gallery wall (e.g., "Why is autonomy assumed to be universal?").
- Depth of assumption‑challenge in exit tickets.
Student Feedback
- Quick survey on LMS (1–5 scale): "This session helped me question my own assumptions about professionalism."
- Open‑ended: "What aspect of the inquiry was most/least engaging?"
Modification Strategies Based on Theory
- If students struggled with critique, next session could include a direct instruction on "how to identify hidden assumptions" (scaffolded inquiry).
- If debate was too adversarial, shift to a "structured controversy" format with mandatory reflection after each argument.
- If documents were too dense, use shorter excerpts with guiding questions.
Session Preparation Checklist