106


Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies/Sodobna pedagogika


Danijela Makovec

Let./Vol. 69 (135)
Št./No. 3/2018
Str. 28–47/pp. 106–125
ISSN 0038 0474

The Dimensions of Teacher’s
Professional Development
Abstract: The article examines the conceptions of the role of teachers in planning and conducting
instruction. The thesis that teachers perform several roles in their work is generally established.
However, an in-depth investigation reveals that different researchers have addressed this matter from
different perspectives. The first part of the article presents the conceptions of the role of teachers in
Slovenia and abroad. We conclude that answers to the question about the qualities of good teachers
and the roles they (should) perform cannot be found in a simple set of desired qualities or competences
expected of teachers. The issue should be approached through multiple layers and wider contexts (the
environment, the school subject, years of service, etc.). The second part of the article presents the findings
of a research study conducted in 16 Slovenian grammar schools in which the teachers confirmed our
preliminary thesis that, in their work, they occupy several roles that are necessarily intertwined. The
article also presents seven dimensions of the role of teachers that were identified by the participating
teachers as crucial for their work.
Keywords: the role of teachers, didactic excellence, pedagogical excellence, subject excellence
UDC: 37.011.3-051
Scientific article

Danijela Makovec, PhD, assistant professor, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Department of Educational
Sciences, Aškerčeva cesta 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; e-mail: danijela.makovec@ff.uni-lj.si



Makovec

107

Introduction
A consideration of education without a consideration for the teacher is inconceivable. Setting all the paradigms and scientific disciplines aside, the teacher
plays a pivotal role in determining the quality of instruction and the success or
failure of school reforms.
Teaching is described as an intentional act, the chief purpose of which is to
stimulate students to learn (Qvortrup in Beck 2008, p. 467). Whatever our attitudes are towards what teaching is (or should be), the teacher always has a central
role. More contemporary views on the role of teachers, however, suggest that is it
very hard to conceive of a universal role. According to Biddle (in Beijaard 1995,
p. 283), the role of teachers are often vaguely defined and used in multiple ways.
Elsewhere, Pettersson (2004, p. 590) maintains that the role of teachers consists
of a variety of culturally defined roles. This implies that cultural and social events
and environments specify how the role of teachers is developed, and influence how
it is understood in different cultures, societies and geographic environments. Thus,
it is difficult to offer a comprehensive definition of the role of teachers without
considering the diverse cultural, geographical and social environments. What is
certain, however, is that a number of factors influence how the role is defined. The
first part of this article presents how the role of teachers is understood by some
Slovenian and foreign authors, and the second part presents the findings of an
empirical research study into understandings of the role of teachers.
On the role of teachers
An extensive review of the past literature reveals that there has always been a
set of elements involved in defining the role of teachers. Fishburn (in Adams 1970,
p. 122) has identified these six roles: (a) director of learning, (b) guide, (c) counsellor,
(d) mediator of the culture, (e) school-community liaison, and (f) member of the
profession. Havighurst and Neugarten (ibid.) have identified two roles. The first
role relates to adults in the school system and sees the teacher playing the role

108

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

of an employee, subordinate to the principal, advisor to superiors, colleague, and
follower. The second role relates to pupils and consists of roles such as mediator of
learning, disciplinarian, surrogate parent, confidante, and representative of middleclass morality. Trow (ibid.) differentiates between three types of teacher roles. The
teacher performs extra class roles, which include faculty member, community liaison
officer, and learner. The teacher also plays the role of an administrative and executive, and it includes disciplinarian, measurer-record keeper (or clerk), learning-aids
officer (or librarian), and programme director (or planner). The teacher’s third role
is an instructional role, which includes motivator, resource person, evaluator and
adaptor. In the mid-20th century in Slovenia, Gogala (1966) wrote about the teacher
as a person who requires a charismatic personality, adequate expertise (in the area
they teach) and methodology skills (Gogala 1966). Resman’s (1990) well-known
definition in Slovenia specifies that a teacher plays the three roles of employee,
expert, and person and personality. The author states that “all the three levels are
always present in a teacher’s work; none can be excluded. Due to the demand for
satisfying teachers’ social and individual (personal) needs, the three levels should
act more or less in unison” (Resman 1990, p. 31).
Given the contemporary discussions on the role of teachers in the context
of professional development, we are unlikely to find a definition that considers
teachers to play one role only. Nevertheless, there seems to be a general agreement
that an important element that affords teachers a professional identity involves
what teachers do to ascribe a role to themselves or the role that the environment
ascribes to them (see Nias 1989; Goodson and Cole 1994; Volkmann and Anderson,
1998; Valenčič Zuljan 2001; Muršak et al. 2011). Beijaard (1995) suggests that the
teacher’s professional identity consists of three factors: the subject they teach; their
relationship with the students; and their role or role conception (ibid., p. 282). The
final factor is closely connected with the first two factors—attitudes towards the
subject and relationships with the students—and should not be regarded as being
independent of them. According to Biddle, most interpretations of what teachers’
roles are refer to teachers’ tasks, social position, image, status or other people’s
expectations (particularly of students and parents) (Biddle in Beijaard 1995, p. 283).
We would like to emphasise the works of two international authors on the
role of teachers. Beijaard and colleagues (2004), as noted earlier, define teachers’
roles in terms of the teacher as (a) a subject matter expert, (b) a pedagogical expert,
and (c) a didactical expert. In the capacity as a subject matter expert, knowledge of
the subject area features prominently, being scientific or theoretical. The teacher
is seen as someone who has a profound grasp of their subject (Poom-Valickis et
al. 2012, p. 235). Beijaard writes: Traditionally, knowledge of subject matter is a
relevant part of a teacher’s professional knowledge base. Until some decades ago,
most people believed that knowledge of subject matter and some on-the-job training
was sufficient for being a good teacher. Nowadays, it is widely accepted that such
a conception of teaching takes insufficient account of the complexity of teaching,
and new conceptions of the teacher as classroom manager, facilitator of learning,
etc. are acknowledged (Beijaard et al. 2000, p. 751).

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


109

As a didactical expert, the teacher is expected to cultivate a supportive learning
environment with optimal use of teaching and learning methods. The teacher is
primarily seen as being responsible for designing and guiding students’ learning
processes (Poom-Valickis et al. 2012, p. 235). According to Beijaard and colleagues,
traditional, teacher-centred methods of teaching have been replaced by more
student-centred methods—methods that put greater emphasis on learning than
on teaching (Beijaard et al. 2000, p. 752): ‘This shift in conception of teaching has
far-reaching consequences for the role of teachers in general, and for his or her
knowledge and skills in particular’ (ibid.). The emphasis on the role of teachers as
a pedagogical expert is on relationships, values, and moral and emotional factors.
The teacher is seen as someone who supports the child’s development as a human
being (Poom-Valickis et al. 2012, p. 235). Beijaard states that teaching cannot be
reduced to a technical or instrumental action that results in learning gains with
students. This didactic side of the teaching profession must be related to a pedagogic
side with ethical and moral features (Beijaard et al. 2000, p. 751). The pedagogical
aspect is important for teachers’ personal and professional conceptions of their role
(Beijaard 1995), and the author writes that ‘in our postmodern societies, teachers
increasingly face moral, social and emotional dilemmas, such as: […] How can we
educate students with multicultural and different social backgrounds? […] How
do we deal with ‘deviant’ student behaviour? […] Apart from these dilemmas,
teachers should be aware of many norms and values involved in their interaction
and relationship with students (Beijaard et al. 2000, p. 752).
The GoodWork Project gives useful insights about the role of teachers. The
project was led by Howard Gardner at Harvard University. The essence of GoodWork
is summed up in the definition that ‘good work’ is ‘high quality, socially responsible
and personally meaningful’ (Fischman et al. 2006, p. 385). ‘Good work’ is technically excellent, personally engaging and ethical (the GoodWork Project 2011, p. 5).
Fischman and colleagues (2006, 2010) speak of three E’s, emphasizing that good
work is only possible when the individual reaches all the three E’s. The project
defines excellence, as the first E, as work ‘that is high in quality and technically
sound; it meets or exceeds standards by which other work is judged [within each
specific area]’ (Fischman et al. 2010, p. 31). Excellence in teacher mentoring can
be defined as ‘the pedagogic and classroom management skills required for good
teaching and learning to occur’ (Pang 2012, p. 8). The teachers participating in
the project stressed that it is important they are experts in the subject they teach
(ibid., p. 9). They also included ‘skills in classroom management, teaching methods,
strategies for supporting learning, collecting and analyzing data (quantitative
and qualitative) and the ability to be a reflective practitioner’ (ibid.). Ethics, as
the second E, is defined as ‘social responsibility—being responsible for the impact
that work, behaviour, decisions and products can have on others’ (Fischman et
al. 2010, p. 67). Teachers think that ethical work ‘rests on their understanding
of the nature of their work and its boundaries’ (Pang 2012, p. 14). During their
work, teachers are faced with uncertainty about whom they are most responsible
for; they often weigh the impact (or consequences) that their actions would have
on the parties involved, especially when there are conflicting interests (ibid.). In

110

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

response to a relevant question, the majority of the teachers identified ‘students’
as their primary responsibility in work (Fischman et al. 2006, p. 386), followed
by students’ parents, school administrators and colleagues, and the larger community (ibid.). As opposed to some other professions, teachers rarely impute more
responsibility for their work to themselves than to the opinions and evaluations of
others. They are taking more responsibility for their students than in the past (both
for the students’ learning as well as social, developmental and emotional needs).
This is mainly because of the social circumstances affecting families, emphases
on material objects, and the increasing pace of society (ibid.). When carrying out
their work, it is important that individuals find it personally engaging (the third
E): ‘In order to spend the time and energy it requires to produce work that is high
quality and has a positive impact on others’ (Fischman et al. 2010, p. 107). Personally engaging work is a precondition for excellence and ethics. In this respect,
the teachers referred to the flow and the sense of fulfilment that they experienced
through work (Pang 2012, p. 11). When working with students, many teachers discussed the challenge of meeting students’ needs without compromising their own
personal and professional values. Some teachers thought that focusing too much
on students’ personal problems may encroach on their professional values about
their role as a teacher (Fischman et al. 2006, p. 392). Consequently, the teachers’
personal commitment included two areas that they found very important: (a) personal relationships with students, (b) students’ learning (academic achievement)
(ibid., p. 393).
Slovenian authors studying the role of teachers also write that the teacher
performs a number of roles for which sound knowledge is required. Marentič
Požarnik sees the teacher as someone who always reacts in the classroom as ‘a
complete personality with their wishes, needs, emotions, vision’ (Marentič Požarnik
2003, p. 6), whether they admit it or not. Their ‘actions and technical professional
competences are only the external side’ (ibid.) of their complete personality, which
should always be taken into account when trying to understand the role of teachers.
In addition, the teacher’s engagement with educating is carried out in accordance
with their attitudes towards students, respect for them, expectations of them, and
their mastery of the methods they use to inspire students cognitively and emotionally (Marentič Požarnik 2014, p. 118). Hence, the author gives equal prominence
to the knowledge of the discipline and adequate pedagogical and psychological
qualifications. Elsewhere, Muršak, Javrh and Kalin (2011) state that an important
part of the teacher’s professional identity is represented by the image of the perfect
teacher, which is an abstraction of concrete individuals and their characteristics
(Muršak et al. 2011, p. 72). The (beginner) teacher commences building their image
based on the knowledge they acquire at the university and their own experiences
gained throughout their own education with different teachers. In the classroom,
the teacher has to take on a variety of roles, meaning that mastering the discipline
alone may not be sufficient. The authors thus believe that, during their education
and training, teachers should acquire both the knowledge of the subject matter
and the so-called ‘soft skills’ (i.e. pedagogical and psychological qualifications):
The issue of teachers’ education refers primarily to the relationship between their

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


111

expert and pedagogic competences. […] Doing away with the borders between the
two may be risky, especially if we start from the assumption that teachers’ preparation is entirely down to the discipline and expertise, without adequate pedagogic
knowledge (ibid., pp. 27–28).
Peklaj et al.’s (2009) understanding of the role of teachers is similar, and she
writes that the teacher is bound to execute (in equal measure) both information
and formation tasks, which are prescribed by the syllabus goals. She maintains
that ‘separating information from formation goals is only possible theoretically,
whereas in the classroom information and formation goals do not exclude each
other at all—they usually intertwine (ibid. 2009, p. 29). The teacher’s different
roles intertwine accordingly. The authors also emphasise that, when considering
the teacher’s profession and the competences that they need in their work, we
should always take account of the wider contexts in which they do their work. We
should also enable teachers to do their job so as to make the process of learning the
centre of their work (ibid., p. 13). She also asserts that to be a successful teacher,
one needs the knowledge of the subject and pedagogical competences.
Although in Slovenia we come across of sets of knowledge, skills, also competences more often than concrete definitions of the teacher’s roles that various
research studies (e.g. Marentič Požarnik 2005; Peklaj 2006; Peklaj and Pečjak 2015)
have recognized as required for the teacher’s work, it is important to underline that
the answer to what the qualities of good teachers are (or what their roles are) cannot
be found simply in a set of the teacher’s desired characteristics, which is stressed
by Kovač Šebart (2002) and Peklaj (2009), or competences, which is emphasized by
Korthagen (2004). The issue should be approached through more layers and the
wider contexts (the environment, the school subject, years of service, etc.) taken
into account, too. The teacher’s role has an important impact on the teacher’s
everyday actions and their professional development; therefore, studying these
issues should be given enough attention. Studying the issues is also important,
mainly because ‘teachers are among the adults with whom children and young
people have the most interaction; they must dare to hold themselves clear, living
and deliberate examples in relationship to the knowledge, skills and values which
shall be shaped’ (Pettersson et al. 2004, p. 591).
Methodology
Defining the research problem
The first part of this article looked at some of the definitions of the role of
teachers, as understood by some Slovenian and international authors. Regardless
of their different starting points or scientific disciplines, they all emphasise that
teachers perform a variety of interconnected roles, collectively contributing to a
self-image of teachers. Despite some similarities, there is no unanimous definition or
agreement on elements that specify the role of teachers, indicating the complexities
involved. The role of teachers is hardly static, but malleable as a result of profes-

112

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

sional development (see Day et al. 2006). The multilayered and multidimensional
nature of the role of teachers is demonstrated by a number of research studies
on the role of teachers (e.g. Beijaard 1995, 2004; Pang 2012; Poom-Valickis et al.
2012, 2013; Zlatković et al. 2012). Using the findings of other authors, we offer the
following definitions of the role of teachers:
a) The teacher’s subject excellence presupposes that teachers’ expertise is
not superficial, but extensive, that they are proficient at the subject matter
that they teach, that they follow the findings of the discipline and that
they review and update their knowledge of the subject.
b) The teacher’s didactic excellence relates to how teachers transmit their
knowledge to students. Mastering the knowledge of the discipline means
that an individual is an expert in the field, whereas transmitting the
knowledge to students in a way that helps them understand the knowledge
makes the individual a ‘good’ teacher. Not everybody can reformulate
the knowledge they possess into a form that is suitable and understandable for those who do not have that knowledge. The dimension is closely
related to the use of different didactic methods. However, it does not
only signify a wide range of methods and ways of teaching. As part of
didactic excellence, the teacher takes account of class dynamics and of the
students’ age, prior knowledge, and attitudes towards the subject; she or
he also factors in the individual characteristics of both the class and the
learners.
c) The teacher’s pedagogical excellence is closely linked to the educational
factors of instruction; interest in students’ personal issues and dilemmas;
solving educational and disciplinary problems in or outside the class; the
teacher’s respectful, moral, decisive and consistent actions both inside
the class and among colleagues. Pedagogical excellence is a role that is
equal to subject and didactic excellence roles. This is mainly because the
school is, by definition, an educational institution and teachers, as its
prominent representatives, always act educationally in it—even if they
are not always very successful.
In our study, we examined the extent to which each of the roles above featured
prominently in the work of teachers at the selected grammar schools in Slovenia.
We were also interested to find out which of the areas or statements in the questionnaire reliably and validly measured each of the defined roles. We also tried to
understand whether any of the roles differed significantly from the others (i.e. the
role that the teachers found more important to their work). Finally, we were also
curious to establish, if possible at all, the interconnectedness and interdependence
of the defined roles.

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


113

Sampling and data collection
This research used convenience sampling. A total number of 345 teachers
from 16 grammar schools1 agreed to participate. in which the students from the
Department of Educational Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, did
practical work in the academic year 2014/2015. The sample was made up of 76.9%
women and 23.1% men, teaching 23 different school subjects. Their length of service ranged from one to 36 years (the average length of service in the sample was
19 years). The majority of the teachers (277, i.e. 81.0%) had a university degree;
more than half of the respondents (169, i.e. 52.8%) were also class teachers. The
survey was conducted in November 2014. The questionnaires were left in the
staffrooms for the teachers to complete and leave in the special boxes, ensuring
participants’ anonymity.
Data analysis
We used the SPSS 22 software package and AMOS 22 for structural equation modelling to process the data. Due to the complexity of the studied phenomena and the existence of both exogenous and endogenous variables, we
employed the SEM method (structural equation modelling) to analyse the
teachers’ roles, particularly in the areas pertinent to interconnectedness and
interdependence.
Method
We prepared a questionnaire for our study, which included 68 statements
relating to the teachers’ actual and concrete work. We asked the participating
teachers to use the four-point scale to assess how true each of the statements was
for them, with 1 meaning ‘not true for me at all’ and 4 meaning ‘absolutely true for
me’. The teachers’ pedagogical excellence was referenced in 30 of the statements;
22 statements referred to the teachers’ didactic excellence, and 16 statements addressed the teachers’ subject excellence. To minimise bias, we refrained from giving
any clues about the roles, and limited our role to distributing the questionnaires
only. We formulated the dimensions after the basic analysis was complete, taking
account of the content of the statements linked to each of the studied roles. The
final model, which shows the interconnectedness dimension of the teachers’ role,
does not include all the statements. We took this decision because of the insufficient
The participating grammar schools were: Gimnazija Jurija Vege Idrija, Gimnazija Nova
Gorica, Gimnazija Ptuj, Gimnazija Tolmin, Gimnazija Jesenice, Gimnazija Celje – Center,
Gimnazija Kranj, Gimnazija Novo mesto, Zavod sv. Frančiška Saleškega; Gimnazija Želimlje,
Gimnazija Škofja Loka, Gimnazija Ledina Ljubljana, Gimnazija Brežice, Srednja vzgojiteljska
šola in gimnazija Ljubljana, Zavod sv. Stanislava, Škofijska klasična gimnazija, Gimnazija
in srednja šola Rudolfa Maistra Kamnik and Gimnazija Franca Miklošiča Ljutomer.
1

114

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

variability of the variables (some variables demonstrated pronounced left skewness and in some places also pointedness), or because the relationships between
the variables inside the construct were insignificant, compared to the variables
that we assumed had measured a different construct. We excluded these variables
from the analysis in order to ensure the content validity alongside other types of
validity and reliability of the instrument.
First, we tested the adequacy of the collected data for the reduction of the
variables to a smaller number of factors. The results of Bartlett’s test of sphericity
(c2 = 3096.26, df = 231, p < 0.001) point to the existence of the variables’ correlation, and the value of the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin statistics (KMO = 0.883) indicates
the adequacy of sampling, which means that a further reduction of variables is
sensible and adequate. The first extracted factor explains 33.45% of the construct
variability, which shows a sufficiently high level of explained variance. In the next
step, confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the convergent and discriminant
validity of the constructs in the model, along with the validity of the measurement
model with the statistical method of structural equation modelling (SEM). In the
measurement model, we were interested in the relationships between the observed
and the latent variables, but not the causal relationships among the latent variables. First, we had to achieve the goodness of fit of the model, which is tested with
a number of indicators, that is, with the measures of absolute fit, incremental fit
and parsimonious fit (Hair et al. 2010).
As Table 1 illustrates, all the required indicators of the goodness of fit (absolute
fit (χ2 = 2,030; df = 188; RMSEA = 0,055), parsimonious fit (PNFI = 0.716), and
incremental fit (NNFI = 0.919, CFI = 0.934) demonstrate a good fitness of the
model, which also reveal a good reliability and validity of the results. The measurement model is statistically significant at the level of p < 0.001 (c2 = 381.6; df = 188).
Valid values

Measurement
model

c2

/

381.614

df

/

188

p

/

0.000

c2 /df

< 3.00

2.030

RMSEA

< 0.05 or 0.08

0.055

NNFI

> 0.90 or 0.95

0.919

CFI

> 0.90 or 0.95

0.934

PNFI

> 0.60

0.716

Table 1: Indicators of the goodness of fit of the measurement model

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


115

We used the factor analysis results to prepare a model that suited the indicators of the goodness of fit that was valid and theoretically adequate (with suitable
content validity). We tested the validity of the measurement model with convergent
and discriminant validity; we used the measure of the share of average explained
variance among the observed variables, which define the construct of the average
variance extracted (AVE) and squared inter-construct correlation (SIC). Convergent validity occurs when the AVE values for each individual construct reach or
exceed 0.5, while the SIC values among the constructs must be lower than AVE
to conclude there is discriminant validity (ibid. 2010). We concluded that the
composite reliability of the constructs was high enough (see Table 1), and, based
on the AVE values, we concluded that the constructs were sufficiently distinct
from one another. We used Cronbach’s coefficient alpha to test the internal consistency of the constructs. The values of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha exceeded
the threshold values (0.700) for all the constructs with the exception of construct
DID 2, which was a little below the threshold. We assume that the slightly lower
value of the Cronbach’s coefficient alpha in this case was due to the small number
of indicators (2) making up this construct. The value of standardised regression
loadings were between 0.6 and 0.827, which indicates a sufficiently high saturation
of constructs.
Results
Based on confirmatory factor analysis, we established that the originally assumed three dimensions of the role of teachers were multidimensional constructs
made up of different variables. Table 2 shows all three dimensions, together with
the values of the indicators of the validity and reliability of individual constructs.
The teacher’s excellence appears to be a seven-dimension construct; this does not
confirm the original assumption about the three dimensions of the teacher’s excellence. It appears that each of the assumed dimensions of the teacher’s excellence
consists of at least two more dimensions that represent an independent, complete
entity. The term ‘dimension’ in the table denotes individual parts of the three central constructs of the role of teachers. The dimensions were named in accordance
with the content definition of the variables that were included in each dimension
from all the variables that measured the role of teachers. The variables included
in each dimension are given in the column ‘measured variable’.

Educational and
My students take part in creating classroom rules.
disciplinary actions
in the classroom
I make decisions on solving disciplinary offences
together with the students.

Pedagogical excellence

(PED 1)

0.600

I take responsibility for solving educational and
disciplinary conflicts.

0.608

My rules about discipline and behaviour in the
classroom are clear.

0.683

I am consistent.

0.807

(PED 2)

I am decisive.

0.757

0.699

I emphasise the value dimension of the learning
content.

0.821

Didactic excellence
Subject excellence

I plan lessons in detail.
I structure lessons clearly following the established
sequence of didactic phases (e.g. introduction,
presentation, practice, revision, testing, assessment).
(DID 1)
I prepare lesson plans for each individual lesson.
I define operational learning goals for each lesson.
Taking account of
I adapt lessons to my students’ individual
each class’s specific characteristics (their interests, prior knowledge,
characteristics
learning styles).
(DID 2)
Continuing
education and
training and
inclusion of
the discipline’s
development in
instruction
(STR 1)
The legal and
formal aspects of
the teacher’s work
(STR 2)

0.752

0.849 0.527

0.798

0.875 0.508

0.698

0.803 0.540

0.811

0.88

0.711

0.815 0.559

0.759
0.666
0.685
0.736
0.748

When planning work in the classroom, I take
account of the characteristics of the class I teach.

0.721

I participate in continuing education and training.

0.652

I read professional literature.

0.672

I follow development in my subject of expertise.

0.827

I include new developments meaningfully in my
teaching.

0.722

I am fully acquainted with the legal and other
formal rules that affect my pedagogical work.
In my professional pedagogical work, I
consistently follow the formal framework of rules
defined by legislative and other documents.

0.870 0.564

0.647

I encourage my students’ sensitivity for art and
artistic expression.

Detailed lesson
planning

0.783

0.793

The teacher’s
personality
orientation

(PED 3)

0.868 0.500

0.801

I talk to the students whom I assume have
personal problems.

The teacher’s value When planning a lesson, I consider the educational
orientation
effect that the content could achieve.

0.795

Convergent
validity (AVE)

Measured variable

Composite
reliability (CR)

Dimension

Makovec

Internal
consistency
(Cronbach’s α)

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Standardised
regression
loadings (λ)

116

0.520

0.721
0.773

Table 2: The values of standardised regression loadings for individual measured variables and the
measures of validity and reliability for dimensions by individual constructs

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


117

One of the study’s assumptions was that all the three central teacher roles are
intertwined. ‘Understanding the teacher’s role’ was thus examined as ‘a phenomenon’, defined by the interconnectedness of the three roles (the teacher’s didactic
excellence, pedagogical excellence, the subject excellence). As Table 2 demonstrates,
our statistical analysis revealed that not three, but seven dimensions are intertwined.
The role of teachers, as defined throughout this article, consists of all the seven
dimensions that are interconnected and interdependent.
The following diagram illustrates the model of the role of teachers, including
all the three central constructs, each with its associated dimensions. The connections indicated by the arrows represent their correlations.

Figure 1: The measurement model (the correlation between measurement and latent variables)

118

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

Discussion
Using confirmatory factor analysis, we demonstrated that, in the teachers’
work, all the three outlined roles occur. However, our analysis established that the
role is not just a three-dimensional construct as we had first assumed; this is because
each of the three roles consists of two or three further roles (we called them dimensions) that are interrelated. Thus, we no longer speak about a three-dimensional
construct of the role of teachers but about a seven-dimensional construct (see Figure
1), which we will elaborate below.
A number of studies illustrate the multidimensional nature of the role of
teachers (e.g. Yung 2001; Pang 2012; Poom-Valickis et al. 2012; Zlatković et al. 2012).
Having studied teachers in medical schools and identified twelve teacher’s roles,
which they divided into the roles that require more content knowledge and into
those that require more pedagogic knowledge, Harden and Crosby (2000) write that
the teacher is doubtlessly more than a lecturer, and that teaching is a demanding
and complex task (ibid., p. 334), requiring the teacher to have several roles. Beijaard
and colleagues (2000, 2004) offer some definitions of the three teacher roles, which
are very similar to ours, although their methodology significantly differs from ours.
In our study, we found that the teacher’s pedagogical excellence consists of
three dimensions: (a) educational and disciplinary actions in the classroom, (b) the
teacher’s personality orientation, and (c) the teacher’s value orientation. The first
dimension includes the statements2 that refer to setting classroom rules and solving
educational and disciplinary problems in the class. The strongest influence in the
first dimension is exerted by the statement that the teacher allows students to take
part in creating classroom rules. According to Pšunder (2004), involving students
in organising, managing and leading the class is a preventative action, which involves planning preventative discipline. Other authors agree with this remark and
stress the importance of co-creating the rules of behaviour and consequences for
the lawbreakers. They claim that students’ active participation in such activities
(when possible) encourages their responsibility for their own behaviour (Kroflič et
al. 2009). It is important to bear in mind that there are always rules in the school
that are non-negotiable. These rules concern prohibitions in accordance with Article
4 of the Rules on the School Order in the Secondary Schools (2010): the prohibition
of psychological and physical violence in the school, of smoking, drinking alcohol
and taking other drugs in the school, of possessing these substances and trading
them, etc. Other school rules may be subject to agreement between teachers and
students. Research shows that students’ participation in constructing school rules
leads to fewer offences, mainly because students take ownership of the rules and
learn to take responsibility for them (see Kroflič et al. 2009, 2011).
The second dimension of the teacher’s pedagogical excellence relates to the
teacher’s personality orientation. It consists of three statements: the teacher’s
consistency, followed by her or his decisiveness, and then the statement about
classroom rules being clear. The teacher’s consistency is a trait that is considered
2

The statements that were included in each of the dimensions are presented in Table 2.

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


119

vital by a number of authors (including Quintilian, Beccaria (2002) introduces
it as central within disciplinary actions, since the consistency of implementing a
measure can have an impact on its effectiveness (ibid., p. 96). Although Beccaria’s
discussion concentrates on the criminal system, his ideas can extend to schools
(cf. Kroflič et al. 2009).
The third dimension within the teacher’s pedagogical excellence is the teacher’s
values orientation. It consists of three statements, which refer to the teacher being
led, when planning and conducting lessons, by the consideration of the educational
goals and their effects that teachers can achieve in students with the content they
select. This dimension relates to the second role of teachers, which is also evident
from the relationship between this dimension and the other two within the teacher’s
didactic excellence. That lessons should be educative is something that was already
underlined by Herbart (1995), who understood instruction as being one of the
two aspects of true formation. During instruction, formation happens indirectly,
through educational content (also see Javornik and Šebart 1992). Hence, it is vital
that teachers select content that has sufficient educational value. Taking account
of education as ‘the state that is essentially a by-product’ (Elster in Salecl 1988, p.
119), ‘educational goals can only ever be by-products of education’ (ibid., p. 122),
and can never be achieved in a straightforward manner. Medveš (1991) writes
that educational effect originates in teachers’ knowledge, and the ways in which
they transmit the knowledge. It is therefore necessary for teachers to consider the
educational effect of their lessons during the planning stage, selecting the content
that they think will facilitate achieving the intended goals, and taking account of
the specific characteristics of the classes and students they teach.
The second role of teachers that we analysed was the teacher’s didactic excellence, comprising two dimensions: detailed lesson planning, and taking account of
each class’s specific characteristics. Although lesson goals are normally specified
in the syllabus, it is the teachers who ‘make the necessary and crucial, final decisions of specifically what and how to teach’ (Reid 2014, p. 75). Consequently, their
preparation for teaching is essential. Teaching does not start when teachers enter
the classroom; it starts when they plan the lesson; define and operationalise the
goals; specify the content; and structure the lesson according to the didactic phases.
Makovec Radovan’s (2017) study demonstrates that good planning is crucial. In the
present study, the participating teachers emphasised the significance of planning,
both in terms of content and form. After all, lesson planning is teachers’ everyday
task and part of their formal obligation, which is evident from the links between
this dimension and the dimension of the legal and formal aspects of the teacher’s
work. In e-learning, lesson planning is also important, since it has a powerful
impact on the quality of learning and social interactions among the participants
(Radovan and Kristl 2017). Teachers write their lesson plans in a great variety of
ways. Beginner teachers usually structure their lessons in more detail, whereas
more experienced teachers define the goals and structure of the lesson in less
detail. Nonetheless, what really matters is that teachers prepare for their classes
because this is an important path to ensure quality lessons. Harjunen states that
didactic interaction – whose characteristics are related to the teacher’s profes-

120

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

sionalism and which is directed towards the teacher’s most important task, that
is, the goals of their work (Harjunen 2010, p. 27) – is the necessary precondition
for pedagogic authority. It is also the essence of the teacher’s work (ibid., p. 25).
Didactic excellence is an important area that defines the role of teachers in two
ways. It holds that the primary task of teachers is teaching, and the obligation of
each teacher is to do their work professionally and to be well prepared for their
lessons. The time that teachers have to achieve educational goals is limited, and
students deserve to have educational content presented in a way that enables them
to learn as much as possible. Teachers participating in our study were well aware
of this; this claim is supported by the strong link between detailed lesson planning dimension and that of taking account of each class’s specific characteristics
(r = 0.68).
The second dimension in the construct was made up of two statements relating
to teachers’ lesson planning. Both confirm the thesis that teachers cannot plan their
lessons in a uniform manner (the same plan for all the classes of a specific year).
Rather, they have to take account of the specifics of each class during the planning and delivery stages. Generally, only small modifications are required for each
class; however, they can have a significant influence on the lesson quality, the end
results, and the teacher-student relationship. This latter effect plays an important
role in defining the role of teachers. According to Harjunen (2010), teacher-student
relationships that develop at different levels are also established through teaching,
motivation, and the development of students’ basic skills. Teachers’ first step towards
a quality relationship with students is certainly good preparation for classes, letting
students know that they do their work professionally without underestimating their
worth. Moreover, developing content that takes account of students’ interests will
strengthen the relationship between teachers and students. These are simple ways
that teachers can convey respect for their students—an expression that they care
and that they approach students in a serious and responsible manner. With such
attitudes, teachers can expect (and demand) serious and responsible actions from
their students (also see Bingham and Sidorkin 2004; Kroflič 2010).
The third role we studied was about the teacher’s subject excellence. It consists of two dimensions: (a) continuing education and training and inclusion of the
discipline’s development in instruction, and (b) the legal and formal aspects of the
teacher’s work. The first dimension forms the basis for teachers’ professional activity.
In the classroom, teachers are representatives of the discipline they teach. Therefore,
it seems logical that they should know the discipline, follow its development, and
include new findings in their instruction. The professionalism of those who teach
others has been required since antiquity, and the expectation that teachers be well
acquainted with the subject they teach has always been emphasised by all the leading
historical figures (e.g. Aristotle, Quintilian, Comenius, etc.). Kovač Šebart (2009)
relates teacher professionalism to the nexus at which knowledge resides and her or
his authority stems from. Šteh and Kalin (2006) write that (future) teachers do not
need ‘only content knowledge of their discipline, but they require good knowledge
of pedagogy and psychology, qualification to plan the curriculum, the knowledge of
the didactic procedures of the subject, [and] the knowledge of students’ (Šteh and

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


121

Kalin 2006, p. 80). These requirements also point to how teacher professionalism
is understood as a precondition for their work.
Nevertheless, we should not assume that teacher professionalism acts independently of the other two dimensions (didactic and pedagogical excellence).
A successful teacher is someone who can impart their knowledge to their students
in a way that is comprehensible. This is a challenge facing future teachers, participants in additional teacher training programmes and those who work with them.
Being an expert in a field means having considerable expert knowledge. However,
to successfully impart knowledge to students requires that teachers know how to
deliver it in a way that is easily understandable by students—a task that is easy to
conceive but hard to accomplish.
To sum up, the measurement model (Figure 1) enabled us to corroborate what
Slovenian and international experts have been writing about the role of teachers. In
their work, teachers have several roles, as confirmed by the participating teachers
in this study. This is seen in the seven-dimensional construct (three central roles
divided into two or three dimensions). They also confirmed that the roles they have
are intertwined, which is a significant finding because it illustrates that teachers
are aware of the multidimensionality of their work. Grammar school teachers are
expert and qualified educators in the subjects they teach; they are able to impart
the knowledge of their discipline in a manner that students will understand.
Grammar school teachers have an educational role, too. This is obvious when they
set rules and solve educational and disciplinary issues; it is also evident from the
professional and educational values that they espouse and intend to see achieved
through a specific content. The findings of the study indicate that the participating
grammar school teachers think out educational outcomes when they plan their
lessons; this implies that they attach equal importance to goal formulation and
aspects of instruction that provide key information and are functional. In spite of
the pressures regarding matura examination results, grammar schools remain first
and foremost educational institutions that, in addition to providing students with
quality knowledge, also commit themselves to educating them.
Conclusion
We started this article presupposing that the role of teachers has never been
limited to teaching; rather, the teacher has been responsible for her or his students
in a number of ways. Based on the definitions by Slovenian and foreign authors,
we specified three central roles: the teacher’s didactic excellence, pedagogical excellence, and subject excellence. We examined understandings of these dimensions at
several selected grammar schools in Slovenia.
We concluded that the teacher’s excellence is not a three-dimensional construct
but a seven-dimensional one, and that each of the theoretically presupposed dimensions of the teacher’s excellence consists of at least two subsets that are independent,
complete entities. Our findings confirm the complexity and multiple aspects of the
role of teachers. Our findings show that teacher training programmes should pay

122

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

attention to all the aspects of the role of teachers, and that gaining subject, didactic
and pedagogical knowledge and skills is equally important to (future) teachers. This
was also demonstrated by the research conducted by Marentič Požarnik (2014)
and Peklaj (2006).
By using the measurement model, we succeeded in suggesting strongly that
teachers occupy several roles that need to be enacted somewhat simultaneously.
This means that if one of the roles is missing, the conceptions of the role of teachers
will then collapse. With a role missing, the teacher’s educational work scope is
reduced to either information or formation, thus no longer fitting the definition of
the teacher’s function within the school as an educational institution. We believe
this is an important contribution to be heeded by the academia.
Finally, our research findings indicate that teachers are aware of the responsibilities that the identified roles present them with. This means, primarily, that
teachers take on responsibilities for performing all the roles professionally, ethically,
and to the best of their ability.
It is vital that students, parents, school managers and other interested parties
appreciate teachers’ different roles. Only when teachers are recognised as experts
who possess subject, didactic and pedagogical excellence, will we be able to speak
about schools as complete educational institutions.
References
Adams, S. R. (1970). Analysing the teacher’s role. Educational Research, 12, issue 2, pp. 121–127.
Aristotel (2002). Nikomahova etika. Ljubljana: Slovenska matica.
Aristotel (2010). Politika. Ljubljana: GV Založba.
Beccaria, C. (2002). O zločinih in kaznih. Ljubljana: Pravna fakulteta in Cankarjeva založba.
Beck, S. (2008). The teacher’s role and approaches in a knowledge society. Cambridge Journal
of Education, 38, issue 4, pp. 465–481.
Beijaard, D. (1995). Teachers’ Prior Experiences and Actual Perceptions of Professional
Identity. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 1, issue 2, pp. 281–294.
Beijaard, D., Verloop, N. and Vermunt, J. D. (2000). Teachers‘ perceptions of professional
identity: an exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 16, issue 7, pp. 749–764.
Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C. and Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, issue 2, pp. 107–128.
Bingham, C. and Sidorkin, A. M. eds. (2004). No education without relation. New York:
Peter Lang.
Day, C., Kington, A., Stobart, G. and Sammons, P. (2006). The personal and professional
selves of teachers: stable and unstable identities. British Educational Research Journal, 32, issue 4, pp. 601–616.
Fischman, W., DiBara, J. A. and Gardner, H. (2006). Creating good education against the
odds. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36, issue 3, pp. 383–398.
Fischman, W. and Barendsen, L. (2010). Goodwork Tollkit. Exellence. Ethics. Engagement©
The Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College on behalf of Project Zero. Retrieved
from: http://www.thegoodproject.org/pdf/GoodWork-Toolkit-guide.pdf (Accessed on
11. 5. 2016).

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


123

Gogala, S. (1966). Obča metodika. Ljubljana: Državna založba Slovenije.
Goodson, I. F. and Cole, A. L. (1994). Exploring the teacher’s professional knowledge: Constructing identity and community. Teacher Education Quarterly, 21, issue 1, pp. 85–105.
The GoodWork Project®: An Overview. (2011). GoodWork Project® Team. Retrieved from:
http://thegoodproject.org/pdf/GW_Overview-08_11.pdf (Accessed on 8. 12. 2015).
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B. and Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. New
Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Harden, R. M. and Crosby, J. (2000). The good teacher is more than a lecturer – the twelve
roles of the teacher. Medical Teacher, 22, issue 4, pp. 334–347.
Harjunen, E. (2010). Kako učitelji razumejo svojo pedagoško avtoriteto. Vzgoja in izobraževanje,
41, issue 5, pp. 15–31.
Herbart, J. F. (1995). O vzgoji pod javnim vplivom. Sodobna pedagogika, 46, issue 5-6,
pp. 274–279.
Komenský, J. A. (1995). Velika didaktika. Novo mesto: Pedagoška obzorja.
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic
approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, issue 1, pp. 77–97.
Kovač Šebart, M. (2002). Samopodobe šole: konceptualizacija devetletke. Ljubljana: Zavod
Republike Slovenije za šolstvo in Znanstveni inštitut Filozofske fakultete.
Kovač Šebart, M. and Krek, J. (2009). Vzgojna zasnova javne šole. Ljubljana: Center za študij
edukacijskih strategij, Pedagoška fakulteta.
Kroflič, R., Mažgon, J., Klarič, T., Jeznik, K., Štirn Janota, P., Štirn Koren, D., Vončina
Vodeb, V., Ermenc Skubic, K., Lenič, Š., Makovec, D., Rutar, V. and Peček, M. (2009).
Ali poklicne in strokovne šole potrebujejo vzgojni koncept? Ljubljana: Center RS za
poklicno izobraževanje.
Kroflič, R. (2010). Dialoški model avtoritete kot spopad za vzajemno pripoznanje (Feministična
kritika lacanovskega pogleda na avtoriteto). Sodobna pedagogika, 61, issue 3, pp. 134–154.
Kroflič, R., Štirn Koren, D., Štirn Janota, P. and Jug, A. (2010). Kulturno žlahtenje najmlajših.
Ljubljana: Vrtec Vodmat.
Kroflič, R., Klarič, T., Štirn Janota, P., Stolnik, K., Gibbs, J. C., Skiba, R., Boone, K., Fontanini, A., Wu, T., Strussell, A., Peterson, Reece L. and Cremin, H. (2011). Kazen v šoli?
Izbrani pristopi k sankcioniranju prestopkov in podpori prosocialnega ter moralnega
ravnanja. Ljubljana: Center RS za poklicno izobraževanje.
Kvintilijan, M. F. (2000). O predšolski vzgoji in osnovni šoli (Institutio oratoria 1, 3–7). Keria:
studia Latina et Graeca, 2, issue 2, pp. 197–218.
Kvintilijan, M. F. (2000a). Vzgojna navodila učitelju. Vzgoja: revija za učitelje, vzgojitelje in
starše, 2, issue 7, pp. 9.
Makovec Radovan, D. (2017). Pojmovanja vloge učitelja v procesih načrtovanja in izvajanja
pouka v srednješolskem izobraževanju. Doktorska disertacija. Ljubljana: Univerza v
Ljubljani.
Marentič Požarnik, B. (2003). Učitelji kot celovite osebnosti. Vzgoja in izobraževanje, 34,
issue 6, pp. 6.
Marentič Požarnik, B., Kalin, J., Šteh, B., and Valenčič Zuljan, M. (2005). Učitelji v prenovi – njihova strokovna avtonomija in odgovornost. Ljubljana: Znanstveni inštitut
Filozofske fakultete.

124

Sodobna pedagogika/Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies

Makovec

Marentič Požarnik, B. (2014). Kako v šoli ustvarjamo prostor za učenje vrednot. In:
B. Ošlaj and M. Pavliha (eds.). Svetovni etos in celostna pedagogika. Radovljica: Didakta, pp. 116–127.
Medveš, Z. (1991). Pedagoška etika in koncept vzgoje (2. del). Sodobna pedagogika, 42, issue 5-6, pp. 118–134.
Muršak, J., Javrh, P. and Kalin, J. (2011). Poklicni razvoj učiteljev. Ljubljana: Znanstvena
založba Filozofske fakulte.
Nias, J. (1989). Teaching and the self. In: M. L. Holly and C. S. McLoughlin (eds.). Perspective
on teacher professional development. London: Falmer Press, pp. 151–171.
Pang, X. A. (2012). Good Work in Teacher Mentoring: Affirming, Celebrating and Strengthening the Work. Retrieved from: http://thegoodproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/
H175-Final-Paper-Pang_accept-changes.pdf (Accessed on 21. 12. 2015).
Peklaj, C. (2006) (eds.). Teorija in praksa v izobraževanju učiteljev. Ljubljana: Center za
pedagoško izobraževanje Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani.
Peklaj, C., Kalin, J., Pečjak, S., Puklek Lepušček, M., Valenčič Zuljan, M. and Ajdišek,
N. (2009). Učiteljske kompetence in doseganje vzgojno-izobraževalnih ciljev v šoli.
Ljubljana: Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete.
Peklaj, C. and Pečjak, S. (2015). Psihosocialni odnosi v šoli. Ljubljana: Znanstvena založba
Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani.
Pettersson, T., Postholm, M. B., Flem, A. and Gudmundsdottir, S. (2004). The classroom as a
stage and the teacher’s role. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, issue 6, pp. 589–605.
Poom-Valickis, K., Oder, T. and Lepik, M. (2012). Teachers’ Beliefs Regarding their Professional Role: a Gardener, Lighthouse or Circus Director? Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, pp. 233–241.
Poom-Valickis, K. and Löfström, E. (2013). Beliefs about teaching: Persistent or malleable?
A longitudinal study of prospective student teachers’ beliefs. Teaching and Teacher
Education, issue 35, pp. 104–113.
Pravilnik o šolskem redu v srednjih šolah. (2010). Uradni list RS, št. 60/10. Retrieved from:
http://pisrs.si/Pis.web/pregledPredpisa?id=PRAV10047# (Accessed on 30.11.2017).
Protner, E. (2001). Herbartistična pedagogika na Slovenskem (1869–1914). Maribor:
Slavistično društvo.
Pšunder, M. (2004). Disciplina v sodobni šoli. Ljubljana: Zavod Republike Slovenije za šolstvo.
Radovan, M. and Kristl, N. (2017). Acceptance of Technology and Its Impact on Teachers‘
Activities in Virtual Classroom: Integrating UTAUT and CoI into a Combined Model.
Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 16, issue 3, pp. 11–22.
Reid, J. M. (2014). Ethic of Practicality Analysis of Successful Group Curriculum Planning
by Teachers. Interchange, 45, issue 1, pp. 75–84.
Resman, M. (1990). Učitelj – uslužbenec, strokovnjak, oseba in osebnost. In: M. Velikonja and
M. Plestenjak (eds.). Učitelj, vzgojitelj – družbena in strokovna perspektiva. Ljubljana:
Zveza društev pedagoških delavcev Slovenije, pp. 31–36.
Salecl, R. (1988). Vzgoja kot »bistveno drugotno stanje«. Problemi – šolsko polje, issue 11,
pp. 119–125.
Šteh, B. and Kalin, J. (2006). Pogledi diplomantov in študentov Filozofske fakultete na načine
dela pri predmetih pedagoškega usposabljanja. In: C. Peklaj (eds.). Teorija in praksa
v izobraževanju učiteljev. Ljubljana: Center za pedagoško izobraževanje FF, pp. 79–90.

Dimenzije učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja/
The
Dimensions of Teacher’s Professional Development


125

Valenčič Zuljan, M. (2001). Modeli in načela učiteljevega profesionalnega razvoja. Sodobna
pedagogika, 52, issue 2, pp. 122–141.
Volkmann, M. J. and Anderson, M. A. (1998). Creating professional identity: Dilemmas and
metaphors of a first-year chemistry teacher. Science Education, 82, issue 3, pp. 293–310.
Yung, B. H. W. (2001). Examiner, Policeman or Students’ Companion: teachers’ perceptions
of their role in an assessment reform. Educational Review, 53, issue 3, pp. 251–260.
Zlatković, B., Stojiljković, S., Djigić, G., and Todorović, J. (2012). Self-concept and teachers
professional roles. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, pp. 377–384.