Ways in which teachers express what they consider to be in their pupils’ best interest

Abstract

This study sheds light on ways in which teachers express their pupils’ best interest. In a former study it was concluded that teachers draw upon different legitimisation types when interpreting their classroom interactions in terms of their pupils’ best interest. A legitimisation type entails a systematic description of a particular pattern of educational values and ideals. This study focuses on ways in which teachers give expression to these legitimisation types when interpreting their classroom interactions. The results indicate that teachers differ in how they give expression to the legitimisation types when interpreting their classroom interactions in terms of extensiveness, substantiveness, deliberateness and answerableness. Extensiveness relates to the range of legitimisation types that teachers used when interpreting their classroom interactions. Substantiveness relates to the substantive focus teachers had in their way of interpreting their classroom interactions. Deliberateness relates to the manner in which teachers weighed and assessed conceivable legitimisation types. Answerableness refers to the way in which teachers answered for their teaching conduct. Furthermore, the results suggest that the ways in which teachers give expression to the legitimisation types is related to particular educational contexts. In the discussion section, an agenda for teachers’ professional development is suggested.

Keywords:

• pupils’ best interest
• teacher education
• legitimisation types

Notes

1. In accordance with Macmillan English Dictionary, we mean by legitimise ‘to make something seem morally right or reasonable’. Available from: http://www.macmillandictionary.com/thesaurus/british/legitimize [Accessed 21 September 2012].

2. A small range signifies that the decision rules as formulated in notes 3 and 4 for a combined range and a broad range did not apply; that is, teachers draw predominantly on three components and legitimisation types or less.

3. A combined range signifies that four legitimisation types each accounted for at least 15% of the coded text fragments or four components each accounted for at least 15% of the coded text fragments of a teacher’s interview.

4. A broad range signifies that four legitimisation types each accounted for at least 15% of the coded text fragments and four components each accounted for at least 15% of the coded text fragments of a teacher’s interview.

5. Consistent signifies that one legitimisation type accounted for at least 50% of the coded text fragments of a teacher’s interview.

6. Dichotomous signifies that the decision rules as formulated in notes 5 and 7 for consistent and open did not apply; that is, teachers draw predominantly on two or three legitimisation types.

7. Open signifies that at least four legitimisation types each accounted for at least 15% of the coded text fragments of a teacher’s interview.

8. Accountable signifies that the functional and psychological legitimisation types accounted for at least 50% of the coded text fragments of a teacher’s interview.

9. Responsible signifies that the decision rule as formulated in note 8 did not apply; that is, teachers do not predominantly draw on the functional and psychological legitimisation types.