Professional identity

Within the CR paradigm, PI is considered to emerge as an individual exercises agency in a particular social setting, linked to a professional role, enabled and constrained by dynamic structures (Marks & O’Mahoney, 2014).

PI is complex, contestable, dynamic and cross-disciplinary (Davey, 2010). However, it is important:

Ultimately, the quality of teacher-education programmes is a reflection of the state of the hearts and minds of TEs and of their desire and ability to imagine their work in new and refreshing ways and then to take concerted action to realise their visions. (Dinkelman, 2011)

Having a clear sense of ‘who they are’ (‘hearts and minds’) and ‘what they do’ (how they ‘imagine their work’) is necessary to help TEs respond to the changing context in which they work (Davey, 2010). The focus of this study is the work of TEs – what they do, how they do it and why they do in that way – rather than PI per se. However, a working definition of PI in this context is necessary because of the links between PI, structure and agency. A sense of purpose and exercising some control over one’s professional life (agency) are important aspects of PI (Boyd & Harris, 2010; Cochran-Smith, 2006; Davey, 2010; Swennen et al., 2010), as is the social and cultural

environment (structures) in which they work (Davey, 2010). Investigating PI will provide access to an understanding of how TEs perceive their agency and the structures which support and

constrain them. This is illustrated in Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.2 The relationship between structure, agency and PI

_structures Social

Actions/ agency Enable and constrain

Reproduce and transform

Professional identity

39 Investigating the PI of my participants provided insights into the link between structure and agency in this context.

3.3.1 Defining professional identity

How PI is defined in teacher-education research depends on the theoretical position being

adopted by the researchers. There is no empirical research in the field of teacher education which adopts an explicitly critical realist perspective. However, drawing on other traditions, I will present a definition of PI which, I will argue, can be interpreted in terms of structure and agency.

A review of teacher-education research reveals three slightly different perspectives on PI – socio- cultural, psychological and poststructuralist. While this research is from the developed world, the findings are high-level and, I believe, applicable to the context of Kenya. The three perspectives overlap and their different emphases will now be considered.

A number of authors take a socio-cultural stance (Menter, 2011; Swennen et al., 2010; Williams & Ritter, 2010), in which identity is viewed as a relational phenomenon, mediated and developed through practice in particular social and cultural settings. For example, Swennen et al. (2010) see identity as ‘socially constructed self’ (p131), developed in the communities of practice. Wenger (1998) proposed five dimensions of identity that need to be taken into account, within this perspective (adapted from p149):

• Identity as negotiated experience. How do TEs work with others?

• Identity as community membership. How do TEs fit in to the community in which they work?

• Identity as learning trajectory. How does their current role relate to previous roles and experience?

• Identity as nexus of multi-membership. What sub-identities do TEs hold?

• Identity as a relation between the local and the global. What is the impact of the wider discourse and national policies on the TEs?

The psychological or developmental perspective focuses more on the ‘self’, with establishing identity being about developing internal mental models which bring together the ‘situational self’ (developed in interactions with others) and the ‘substantial self’ (self-defining beliefs) (Nias, 1989). This is the view of identity taken by Murray and Male (2005) in their conceptualisation of the journey from being a teacher to being a TE. They argue that the journey is stressful because the substantial self remains the same (‘I am really a teacher’) but the situational self has changed.

40 Finally, a number of studies in the field take a poststructuralist view of identity which emphasises the importance of political context, discursive practice and power in identity formation (White 2014; Dinkelman 2011). Both authors use the four dimensions from Gee (2000)- nature identity, institutional identity, discursive identity and affinity identity - to conceptualise the work of TEs in universities, and conclude that professional identity is best nurtured through involvement with a group of practitioners (affinity identity) and in dialogue with others (discursive identity).

Much of the discussion about TEs refers to ‘professional identity’, raising questions about what ‘professional’ might mean in this context. Murray (2014), acknowledging that it is a contested term, defines it as ‘repertoires (or sets) of professional knowledge and values which articulate the character of teacher-educator practices’ (p8). The existence of ‘sub-identities’ is also a feature of complex professional roles (Wenger 1998; Gee 2000). However, writing about researching identity within a CR paradigm, Marks and O’Mahoney (2014) suggest that CR provides the opportunity to distinguish between identity arising from the roles which people inhabit (professional identity) and the individual’s own beliefs (personal identity).

In a study of the PIs of nine TEs, Davey (2010, adapted from p31) draws on different perspectives to suggest the following definition of PI:

1. PI can be thought of as both personal and social in origin and expression. This recognises that identity is perceived at a personal level, but is socially and culturally constructed. 2. PI can be thought of as multifaceted and fragmented, as well as evolving and shifting in

nature (partly as a result of the impact of national and institutional politics).

3. PI involves emotional states and value commitments. This recognises that identity can be about how you feel.

4. PI necessarily involves some sense of group membership, or non-membership, and identification with a collective. This could be a formal group (e.g. subject specialists) or an informal group. It also recognises that a distinctive ‘teacher-educator identity’ can be articulated, in the way that it can in other professions, despite the complexities of the role.

This definition embraces much of what has been written about TEs. It is not incompatible with Wenger’s conceptualisation of identity, but it perhaps highlights the emotional dimension of being a TE and the impact of the political dimension of ‘the local and the global’. It is fitting that any definition of ‘PI’ should draw on different perspectives, as the professional world is complex and messy; a single perspective could limit the scope of analysis.

41

3.3.2 Professional identity in the context of critical realism

Davey’s definition of PI is consistent with a CR perspective (2010), embracing aspects of structure and agency, and provides a lens to examine the work of a particular group of TEs: what they do, how they do it and why they decide to act in certain ways. The definition is effectively suggesting that the work of TEs will be influenced by:

A. past histories, including roles and experiences (see points 1 and 3 above); B. the professional knowledge that they hold and value (1, 2 and 3);

C. how they see this complex role (2 and 4);

D. the political, institutional and cultural environment in which they work and their response to that environment (2, 3 and 4);

E. the relationships they have within the institution, with their peers, with teachers and with student teachers (1, 3 and 4);

F. their sense of agency – the extent to which they are empowered to drive their own professional development, and make their own decisions, alongside how they negotiate the complexities of the role (1 and 2).

This list overlaps with the dimensions of teacher education that emerged from Scott’s typology of structures. Discursive structures are represented in points B and D; institutional structures in point E; and structures of agency in points A and F.

Drawing on the tenets of CR and the concept of professional identity, I have thus identified the dimensions of teacher education that need consideration in the design of my research

instruments (see Chapter 5). The literature on PI informed my investigation of ‘agency’. It Chapter 4 I set out the theories which under pinned my investigation of social structure in the context of teacher education.

Before setting out my research questions in critical realist terms, I will explain how my

interpretation of ‘agency’ and ‘structure’ (based on Scott) differs from some studies that I have considered in developing my understanding of the ideas (Hodgkinson-Williams, et al., 2017; Priestley, 2011a). I will then return to these alternative interpretations in Chapter 8 in order to demonstrate how the framework set out here – including embodied, discursive and institutional structures – provided insights which enriched the analysis.