A person cannot be expected to simply transform from one thing into another. We do not go to bed a novice teacher at night and wake up an expert teacher one morning - that is, unless we have gone through some kind of process. Further still, once we have become an expert teacher, is our characterization as such stable? Does everything that an expert teacher does reflect expertise? Perhaps I could be an expert teacher one day and not the next. Perhaps I could be an expert teacher in one action and not in another.
Rather than comparing expert teachers to novice teachers in static states, it might be more useful to look at the practices that expert teachers implement regularly, and also the processes that they have gone through to get where they are today (Tsui, 2009).
When we look at teacher development under Anderson's ACT model of skill learning, teachers move from a cognitive stage, to an associative stage, to an autonomous phase (Randall & Thorton, 2003a). In the first stage, the skill learner (in this case, the teacher) must narrow their focus; for example, using appropriate language for the classroom. Later, the skill learner can begin to relate those things to other aspects of the classroom (e.g. asking appropriate questions), and can eventually let those skills run autonomously.
Although skill development highlights a teacher's ability to perform in the classroom, can it account for the mastery of teaching itself? According to Tsui (2009), teachers can also become experienced non-experts. And while they may have mastered the ability to control a classroom, they still might not possess the qualities of what one would consider an expert teacher.
So, what are those qualities, exactly?
One quality that stands out is a teacher's ability to "problematize what appears to be unproblematic and to tackle problems at a deeper level" (Tsui, 2009, p.194). This process often takes place in the form of critical incidents - events that take place in the classroom that appear to be normal at first, but they become critical when analyzed (Hawkins & Norton, 2009). For example, Farrell (2008) describes a classroom situation in which one particular student does not seem to want to participate in class and is always looking at his phone. At first glance, it may seem that the student is simply uninterested or bored. But upon further reflection, it was found that the student lacked English language proficiency in comparison to the other students in the class, and that he was being judged negatively for his nationality.
Seemingly unproblematic incidents can be problematized and reflected upon through narrative reflective practice (Farrell, 2013), a process whereby the teacher uses a written narrative in order to reflect, problematize and consider alternative conclusions.
You might be asking: "How is this information useful for mentors and mentees?" Firstly, it is important for both mentors and mentees to be aware of the stages that the teacher might go through in the process of becoming comfortable in the classroom. This allows mentors and mentees to design SMART goals throughout the skill learning process. Secondly, it is important for teachers and mentors to move beyond improving their classroom performance as a means to an end. In order to be happy in our jobs, we also need to maintain positive identities as teachers. We are not only defined as good teachers by what we do in the classroom, but also who we are as people.
"To place being and doing in opposition is to imply that one is static, the other active, and the two quite separate. I suggest that identity is not always one thing and that being and doing are entwined" (Granger, 2011).