Strictly teacher-researchers? The influence of a professional RE conference on primary RE teachers’ agency and self-identities as teacher-researchers

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the influence of a professional Religious Education (RE) conference on a small group of English Primary teachers’ emerging identities as teacher-researchers. It is framed by analysis of agency as a means of examining how teachers can become capable producers of knowledge as active partners in dialogue with critical others. The paper argues that attending the conference played a role in increasing teachers’ professional identify and agency because it provided a novel context of action in teachers’ professional lives. Teachers were made aware of a much broader professional community to which they had legitimate membership where knowledge exchange and professional validation was intensified. The conference enabled reflexive thinking that disrupted teachers’ ‘taken for granted’ habits and beliefs by offering new ways of seeing, being and acting, and in which they could forecast teacher-research as a feasible, relevant and purposeful aspect of their professional lives.

KEYWORDS:

• Conferencing
• interpretive phenomenological analysis
• teacher agency
• teacher research

Introduction

This paper explores the potential of conferences for cultivating teachers’ agency as teacher-researchers by reporting on the experiences of nine English Primary Religious Education (RE) teachers who attended a professional RE conference, Strictly RE, in London, England in January 2020. The term ‘teacher-researcher’ denotes teachers conducting structured research into their own practice. The paper’s emphasis on the influence of conferencing on teachers’ emerging researcher identities makes a novel contribution to understanding principles of teacher-research.

The paper opens with the research context. Next Emirbayer and Mische (1998) and Biesta and Tedder (2007) analysis of ‘agency’ is discussed as the conceptual framework for the paper. Then the literature review examines teacher agency and the contributions of conferencing to professional practice. Next the sample, methods and Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) approach used for the empirical data collection are explained. The findings are presented followed by our interpretation of them with reference to agency. The conclusion addresses two research questions: What role, if any, did attending Strictly RE play in increasing teachers’ professional identity and agency? Were teachers more confident about their role as researchers through exploring new possibilities of thought and action, and if so how?

Context

The research is a funded project led by the paper’s authors that investigates Primary RE teachers’ experiences of being teacher-researchers. The project aims to understand the professional value, if any, participating teachers give to being teacher-researchers, and to recommend best practice for supporting teachers researching their own practice. The underpinning axiology of the project is teacher-agency. Nine Primary RE teachers are participating in the project. Between its launch in September 2019 and their attendance at Strictly RE in January 2020, teachers attended two full day and five half day workshops at the host university during which a Community of Practice (COP) was established (Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder 2002). During these workshops teachers received training in research methods, met educational researchers for open discussion about research, and planned projects to research their own professional practice. The ethos of the COP was collaborative; teachers and academics worked cooperatively on teachers’ project-planning rather than teachers being led by the academics. The COP continued to meet monthly after January moving to on-line meetings since March 2020 due to Covid-19 lockdown. Data for the project were collected during the workshops via teachers’ individual reflective journals and focus-group discussions, and outside of the workshops via semi-structured interviews conducted by one of the lead academics.

Teachers were funded to attend Strictly RE as part of the project. The rationale for teachers’ attendance was their exposure to RE research and knowledge exchange, and to raise their awareness of the national RE community. Strictly RE is a national RE conference organised annually by the National Association of Teachers of Religious Education (NATRE) intended for UK RE teachers who are the majority of the delegates. Other delegates include representatives from examining bodies, RE consultants, and academics including those involved in initial teacher education. It is a one-day conference held on a Saturday that follows a traditional format of opening with key note speakers, followed by a wide range of seminars for delegates to choose from, and a closing plenary. Keynotes and seminars are normally informed by research and led mainly by teachers. Seminar topics range across areas of professional interest for RE teachers and there is a large exhibition space for stalls promoting RE resources, links with consultants and community groups. Approximately 360 delegates attended Strictly RE in 2020 (Moss 2020).

Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework for this paper is Emirbayer and Mische’s (1998, 962) analysis of agency. They propose that agency comprises three intersectional phases; iterational, projective and practical-evaluative. The iterational phase is retrospective; it is the idea that an actor engages rationally with their past experiences to inform decisions about present actions. Repetition of existing habits already normative to an actor reinforces the familiar structures within which the actor operates, sustains self-identity, and reproduces societal patterns over time (1998, 971–975, 981). Agency is weak when repetition of habitual beliefs and actions is unreflective and tacit (1998, 994). The projective phase is future looking. In this phase the actor surveys previous habitual beliefs and actions to weigh up future consequences in what Emirbayer and Mische term ‘narrative construction’ (1998, 989). The actor applies reflexivity, imagination and innovation to work through alternative possible responses to a present situation (1998, 984). They imagine alternative scenarios – ‘symbolic recomposition’ – to work out best courses of action – ‘hypothetical resolutions’ – which are tested tentatively in social interactions – ‘experimental enactment’ – before full commitment to a course of action (1998, 989). The reflexivity involved in reconfiguring previous beliefs and actions to predict plausible, preferred future outcomes distinguish the projective phase from the iterational phase. Emirbayer and Mische describe this type of deliberate decision making that requires critical distancing and reflection by an actor as having ‘strong agency’ (1998, 994). It is proactive invention of ‘new possibilities of thought and action’ driven by aspiration for future goals, not passive repetition of past routines (1998, 984). In the projective phase an actor has potential to reconfigure their relationship with their operative structures. The practical-evaluative phase refers to the judgement actors make in response to present situations (1998, 994). Emirbayer and Mische describe this phase as starting with problematisation of the current situation through recognition that it is not resolved; followed by characterisation of previous situations and deliberation over future outcomes to produce considered decisions for best outcomes; leading to informed actions (1998, 997–998).

Drawing on Emirbayer and Mische’s work, Biesta and Tedder (2007) emphasise that agency is ‘acted out’ and ‘achieved’ in the present, practical-evaluative phase, which they describe as ‘contexts-for-action’ (2007, 136). They link this to contexts for learning ‘that may help people to gain (more) control over and give (more) direction to their life’ (ibid. 138). The ecology (features) of an environment (the contexts for action/learning) matters for enabling or disabling people’s agency because, ‘actors always act by means of an environment rather than simply in an environment’ (2007, p136-137 emphasis added). For Emirbayer and Mische agency is motivated by future aspirations that inspire personal reflection of existing beliefs and habits, Biesta and Tedder add that the achievement of agency also ‘depends on the availability of economic, cultural and social resources within a particular ecology’ (2007, 136, 145). They emphasise that novel contexts, or ‘change in people’s lives’, have the potential to spark the critical personal reflection that Emirbayer and Mische argue can lead to strong agency (2007, 139).

Literature review

The literature review investigates links between teachers’ professional identity as researchers and conferences for stimulating agency through new possibilities of thought and action. The first part explores relationships between teacher agency and researcher identities, the second part explores the function of conferences in professional life.

Teacher agency and researcher identities

Literature shows that teachers’ professional identity as researchers can be enhanced ‘through the co-construction of knowledge, whereby local or implicit knowledge in teaching is made explicit’ (Orland-Barak and Tillema 2006, 5). When knowledge generation is linked to the workplace and this knowledge can be shared in a collegial context then it is possible to be more self-critical and open to scrutiny. This in turn ‘offers new ways of seeing, being and acting in the professional world of teachers [by] emancipating them from the mere application of externally generated knowledge to their classrooms’ (ibid.). Stenhouse (1983) has argued that the teacher needs to be a researcher because knowledge and understanding are created in the context of discussion-based enquiry. This means that ‘the teacher must be part of the research community; if not, then research will not apply to education’ (p 212) and that knowledge and understanding should be treated as open to critique so that reflective conversations could be promoted. Another aspect of teachers’ professional identity is having the agency to generate enquiry and formulate hypotheses where teachers are regarded as capable producers of knowledge not reliant on ‘experts’ elsewhere but as an active partner in dialogue with critical others (Goodson 1997).

Literature is generally positive about teachers’ being able to co-construct knowledge but often treats its achievement as unproblematic. However, de Vries & Pieters (2007, 245) argue that formats that facilitate and support the dissemination of the practice-based knowledge that emerges from schools need to be found. Such formats would enable educational researchers and practitioners to participate alongside one another in the same community of practice (Lave and Wenger 1991). Within such a community, knowledge is both social and dynamic and satisfaction is found through collective learning and knowledge creation, belonging to a motivating group and developing a shared sense of professional identity (Wenger, McDermott, and Snyder 2002).

A number of researchers have identified the role of conferences in developing teachers’ researcher identities. Canrinus and colleagues (2011, 604) found that professional development opportunities such as conferences appear to ‘bind teachers [together] as a group of professionals.’ However, this is only the case when teachers bring their own ideas and find that they are validated by others. When this happens, it can lead to the assumption ‘that we are a community of minds studying an important aspect of human life’ (Hickson 2006, 466). Baumfield and Butterworth (2007) found that this sharing of perspectives was enhanced by joint presentations at conferences. This was because ‘the emerging understanding of the consortium members was calibrated against the responses of peers from the wider practitioner and research communities’ (417).

Conferences also contribute to teachers’ agency through providing opportunities for self-reflection that can reconfigure habitual beliefs through novel contexts of action. Stenhouse (1983) has argued that when there is a ‘focus on the dialectic of theory and practice as praxis’ teachers’ existing ways of working are interrogated, and practice is made relevant to theory. Providing that the community of practice does not rely too heavily on its own situated learning then participating in conferences can lead to a reconstruction of teachers’ theorising of their purposes and practices through the interrogation provided by engaging with wider traditions and debates (ibid. 198). Clearly not all conferences will enhance teacher agency axiomatically, but literature shows that practitioner focused meetings can make an important contribution.

Conferences can also stimulate greater teacher autonomy and promote a greater understanding of the implications of their work (Henderson 2014). This is particularly the case when there is an exchange of expertise and insight between academics and teachers. Baumfield & Butterworth (2007, 413) demonstrate that knowledge and action could be challenged and transformed when practitioners made not only their own knowledge and practice problematic but also that of others. This means that conferences have an important role in providing opportunities for building teachers’ agency and authority as creators of knowledge and understanding.

Conferences and professional development

Oester and colleagues (2017, 1) found that conferencing exposed delegates to novel ideas, skills and techniques. Conferences provide opportunities for learning new skills and keeping abreast of developments in the discipline (Hickson 2006). Within the boundaries of a conference theme, delegates can cross-reference the information they are exposed to from their own professional point of view and so conferencing:

provides participants with a confluence of thoughts, links between different related themes, which are all evoked through the concentration of related topics that lead to new ideas and thought patterns (Edelheim et al. 2018, 104).

Good conference experiences lead to ‘change’, ‘growth’ and ‘transformation’ that may not be immediate, but can develop over time (Edelheim et al. 2018, 101). Conferencing can be the means of providing unique intimacy with the professional group, and lead to new knowledge emerging from within the group (Baumfield 2016). Conferences are also a means of bridging the research-practice divide by providing insights, and identifying problems and possibilities (Burkhardt and Schoenfeld 2003, 5). This is because at conferences people from both academic and professional backgrounds ‘with (partly) shared interests and goals meet to share experiential stories, research findings, educational materials, and future visions’ (de Vries and Pieters 2007, 238). In addition, Graham and Kormanik (2004) found that engaging meaningfully in the conference forum enabled research to influence practice, and practice to influence research, reciprocally.

The social side of conferencing brings out delegates’ feelings of belonging to their professional group (Edelheim et al. 2018, 97); their degrees of participation relate to the strength of feeling of belonging. Hickson 2006, 465) sums up the main reason for conferences as: ‘becoming and remaining a professional in the discipline.’ He adds that these professional relationships can then help to solve research or teaching problems. Similarly, Graham and Kormanik (2004) suggest that a feeling of belonging can enable a conversation to begin as part of a community of scholarship by engaging one another meaningfully through the forum offered by a conference.

Oester et al. (2017, 1) argue that, aside from the direct academic pursuit of presenting research, conferences provide opportunities to meet new contacts and are ‘an important venue for brainstorming, networking and making vital connections.’ Conferences are also identified as places for developing ‘professional relationships’ (Edelheim et al. 2018, 102) and ‘coming together with others’ (ibid. 104). This means that conferences should be valued for their social as well as their cognitive outcomes (de Vries and Pieters 2007). For Hickson 2006, 467) networking often results ‘in circles of friends’ that can ‘act as a sounding board for ideas.’ This aspect of conferences is particularly important for newcomers to an area of research and can sustain their interest over time (de Vries and Pieters 2007).

Whilst most of the literature emphasises the positive outcomes of conference attendance Orland-Barak and Tillema (2006) point out that there are downsides too such as teachers feeling intimidated by highly experienced researchers or considering that they have nothing to offer. Wilkinson (2020) has also shown that ‘imposter syndrome’ can inhibit the learning that could take place in conferences. Our findings indicate that teachers’ attendance at a professional conference in a subject within their field of professional interest and expertise ultimately mitigated against feelings of low self-confidence.

Sample, methods and interpretive phenomenological analysis

The research participants are a purposive sample of nine qualified Primary RE teachers. All teach in Primary schools and have significant experience of planning and delivering RE. Between them these teachers also have experience of various leadership roles within their respective schools, and of leadership and networking roles within RE in their regions. One of the teachers attended Strictly RE the previous year, the remainder had never attended this or any similar type of professional conference.

Four sets of data were gathered from the teachers after their attendance at Strictly RE. Two are teachers’ individual reflective journals written in February and again in April, one month and three months after the conference, respectively. In their journals teachers recalled their feelings about attending the conference and their perceptions of its impact on their professional practice. A third data set is a focus-group held in February, immediately after the teachers wrote their first reflective journal. In the focus-group teachers discussed their experiences of attending the conference and its impact on their professionalism and emerging researcher-identities. Data set four is semi-structured interviews conducted by one of the lead academics with six of the teachers in October 2020, nine months after the conference. During the interviews teachers were asked to consider any enduring impact the conference had on their professional development and researcher-identities. Interviews were conducted on-line with teachers, in pairs where they were collaborating with a partner on their own research projects and individually where they were working alone. The focus-group and interviews were audio-recorded with teachers’ permissions. Data were analysed inductively by the lead academics using systematic coding. Codes were clustered into themes that describe the points of importance teachers reported about attending the conference and the meanings they attributed to these. Our interpretation of the data analysis is reported in the discussion below. All phases of the research comply with BERA’s (2018) ethical guidelines and with the ethical guidance of the host university that gave ethical approval for the project. Pseudonyms are used.

The accumulative data collection allowed for changes in teachers’ opinions over a nine-month timespan to be captured and reported on in this paper. Future data collection from teachers will enable us to comment on whether or not they report a longer-lasting impact from attending Strictly RE. The qualitative data is enriched by the rapport already established among the academics and teachers through our joint participation in the COP and the bonding that occurred during the workshops over our shared stories of our professional lives in education. Through this time together teachers came to understand deeply the purpose of the research and to value it. This meant the data were enriched by the spirit of teachers’ and researchers’ shared investment in the project. Though the sample size is small the findings give authentic insight into the meaning teachers attribute over time to their attendance at Strictly RE. The intimate, reflective character of the data is consistent with the Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) approach adopted for this paper.

At the heart of IPA is an attempt to understand the meanings people give to experiences as social actors in their own lives (Smith 2004, 40). IPA is phenomenological because it is interested in participants’ first-hand accounts of their encounters with an experience (phenomena). This requires the researcher to bracket-out preconceptions; to stand-back and allow participants to tell their stories on their own terms. IPA is interpretive because it is not just interested in participants’ descriptive accounts, but also in the meanings they attribute to their experiences (ibid.). IPA is analytic because the researcher’s role is to analyse participants’ interpretive responses and report on their scholastic significance to the wider subject discipline (ibid. 43–44). As a qualitative, phenomenological approach IPA demands a small, purposive sample of participants with shared experience (Smith 2004, 42). For this paper, participants shared the experience of being Primary RE teachers attending Strictly RE. Data collected is phenomenological in its focus on teachers’ particular experiences of (the phenomena of) attending the conference, and interpretive because of its interest in the significance teachers gave to their experiences in relation to their professional and researcher-identities. IPA’s ideographic emphasis is consistent with the project’s axiological standpoint of teacher agency because of its focus on teachers’ own accounts and interpretations (ibid. 41–43).

Findings

Enjoyment

Teachers expressed their ‘enjoyment’ (Victoria, Anna, Jessica) at attending Strictly RE. They rated the experience as ‘fabulous’ and ‘uplifting’ (Maria), ‘really worthwhile’ (Nicole) and ‘extremely useful’ (Sara). Bushra said, ‘it gave me a boost’ and Victoria said she, ‘came away energised and full of enthusiasm’. This positivity remained strong in teachers’ October interviews, nine months after the conference. Jessica recalled that she, ‘really enjoyed it’ and that ‘it lifted you, somehow’. Victoria remembered, ‘we all came away with an absolute buzz’. Despite its benefits, most teachers confirmed that their school would neither fund them nor release them to attend the conference; ‘I don’t think school would fund me’ (Victoria and Bushra), ‘I couldn’t have justified time out of school to go’ (Sara).

Opportunity for reflection

The teachers said the conference gave them what they described collectively as ‘headspace’; an important interruption to their busy professional lives. Jessica and Maria described it as like a ‘holiday’. Anna observed that while there she was not distracted by school or home life, so had to focus on the whole conference experience, ‘[I] chose to go, so it felt like me-time. I stopped [doing anything else] because [whilst there] that’s all I could do’. Maria relished, ‘time to just BE a leader of RE; to explore, reflect, evaluate and develop my expertise’. Anna captured the feeling of the group with her comment that, ‘there’s no reflective time at school’. Sara explained how attending Strictly RE allowed her

to step away from/out of my role [as a senior leader/teacher] and focus on my learning and development. [.] Working in a school there is hardly any time to pause and think, and attending the conference put me firmly in the enforced pause mode.

Importance of new knowledge

Teachers reported that they gained new knowledge at Strictly RE that was of immediate relevance to their teaching practice, and that their existing knowledge was confirmed. This reinvigorated their enthusiasm for creative curriculum and lesson planning. Jessica commented, ‘I am enjoying RE planning and teaching more as I am beginning to incorporate more creative ways of recording/learning in RE lessons’. Having ‘a keen sense of excitement to raise the quality of RE teaching’ (Victoria) and having ‘practical ideas and suggestions to implement [in teaching]’ (Sara) were common responses from the group. Anna, Bushra and Sara gave examples of practical resources and networks they shared with colleagues to, ‘help my practice and that of other staff in my school’ (Anna). Maria commented on sharing renewed motivation for RE as well as resources, ‘it was fantastic to be able to share the wealth of ideas that I learned at Strictly RE to motivate and encourage staff’. Colleagues in Jessica’s school were appreciative; ‘staff are interested in what I learnt and we have spoken about where/when some of these ideas can be adapted/used in our RE lessons’. Teachers reflected on the benefits of new knowledge gained to themselves, their pupils and their schools, which included delivering formal and informal CPD to colleagues in their own schools based on resources and knowledge gained from Strictly RE.

Belonging to the community

Teachers found that the conference contributed to their feeling part of a national RE community. Networking was a valuable boost to morale for teachers who often have to defend RE to sceptical colleagues, pupils and parents. Nicole wrote that it ‘felt good to feel part of something bigger’ and Maria commented how she was, ‘increasingly energised by the atmosphere, input and sense of community’. Victoria was, ‘inspired to be amongst so many likeminded people’. The importance of community continued as a dominant theme in the interviews. Bushra reflected that it was ‘nice to meet RE teachers from other authorities and to connect with other RE professionals.’ Anna captured teachers’ general feeling with her comment:

I love RE. It’s nice to know that other people feel the same; to have conversations with people you’ve never met before who feel the same way about teaching RE and who have come across the same hurdles. […] And other people are on the same page as you.

Shift in attitude towards the status of RE

Teachers were pragmatic about the low status RE often has in schools. The group concurred with Jessica’s point that, ‘unfortunately, RE is competing with SATs (Standard Assessment Tests), Literacy and Numeracy’. Yet teachers also reported how the conference recharged their conviction in RE’s importance in the Primary curriculum. The keynotes and sessions ‘were motivating and made me reflect on the importance of RE’ (Victoria). Nicole was refreshed by a ‘shared optimism about what is possible’, Anna re-evaluated how she prioritised subjects as a teacher, ‘it has made me feel like the maths and RE are on an equal standing’, and Bushra felt RE was ‘being acknowledged’ as ‘one of the most important subjects in the curriculum’. The changing attitude of the group was captured by Jessica’s comment that the conference made her feel RE ‘is very important and needs a more prestigious place in school life … and [now I] know that there are many people who share my views’. The low status of RE recurred as a dominant theme in the interviews ‘RE is the bottom of the heap’ (Nicole). However, teachers’ conviction in RE’s importance endured; ‘I’m proud of RE and I’m pushing RE more’ (Victoria), ‘[Strictly RE] pushed the importance of RE up in my mind’ (Jessica). Nicole remembered how a keynote had inspired her, ‘We like our subject […] it was nice to hear [the speaker] talking about it [as a treasure] because it is something important and special […] it really chimed with how I feel about teaching RE’. Although teachers continued to acknowledge RE’s often low status in the Primary curriculum their willingness to accept this was disrupted because Strictly RE had galvanised them to defend its importance.

How teachers perceive their professional status

There was a consensus during the focus-group that Primary teachers are generally regarded as low status; ‘we’re told we’re not good enough’ (Victoria). The group attributed this, in part, to accountability measures; ‘so much monitoring goes on in schools, and we’re never told “well done” (Maria). They also attributed it to teachers’ multiplicity of professional roles; “There are so many aspects to the job it weakens how much of a good handle you can have on things” (Jessica), “we have to keep all those plates spinning; and then there’ll be something else as well” (Maria). Sara related professionalism to slow decision-making rather than the rapid decision-making that teachers routinely face, “[because] teachers are so hands-on; making a million decisions a minute, you haven’t got space to [feel like you’re being a] professional. You just do it”. Yet teachers reported that the conference affirmed for them their professional value and expertise. “Attending something like [Strictly RE] gives you space to step away [from the immediate demands of school life] and think, I can do this; look what I do” (Sara). The conference prompted Sara’s self-affirmation as a “professional”, a common feeling across the group. At the start of the conference Maria had felt “overwhelmed” and concerned that “as just a class teacher” she was a “pretender”. Her self-belief grew throughout the day until she felt, “I’ve got things to offer and things to learn. It made me feel validated”. Anna signalled the longer-term impact of self-affirmation when she explain her confidence to defend RE during future curriculum planning meetings “armed with facts and information” that she could now draw on. Teachers’ self-affirmation was stimulated by their newly gained knowledge that empowered them, and by their experience of being part of the national RE community that legitimised their self-worth. These feelings of professional validation stayed with teachers and re-emerged in the interviews; ‘it makes you feel like what you’re doing is important and it makes you feel a little bit more purposeful – that you’re doing the right thing’ (Anna), ‘it highlighted what we were doing well at school, and where we need to move to’ (Victoria), ‘[Strictly RE] reaffirmed for me that I’m doing the right thing [in RE planning and teaching]. It was nice to experience a positive reaffirmation of what I’ve been doing in school’ (Bushra). Nicole summed up how Strictly RE reaffirmed her belief in the importance of RE and the professional expertise of teachers.

The conference reminded me how much important work/thinking goes on [and] there is a frustration in feeling that these voices are not heard. But then the conference emphasised that there is plenty going on in schools, it is just that we don’t always know about it. […] it feels like a big, important thing that we’re doing. It’s good to feel like that about your job.

Teachers’ researcher identities

Teachers made explicit connections between the conference and their emerging researcher-identities. Nicole commented that observing other teacher-researchers’ presentations convinced her that conferencing is ‘a very good way of learning about research’. Conversations about research with delegates encouraged Maria that her own research is ‘valid’ and ‘commendable’. Victoria gave this strong affirmation in her second reflective journal:

Attending Strictly RE has definitely motivated me further on my own practitioner-researcher journey by being amongst like-minded people and feeling part of an ‘RE community’ all with a shared vision. It has reaffirmed my own position as a research-practitioner, and the value and benefits research can have, ultimately, on policy and practice. It has increased my excitement and passion for RE, whilst also gaining an understanding and appreciation of the importance that research can have on all our lives as teachers.

In her interview, Anna commented, ‘I feel more like a teacher researcher. […] I feel what we are doing [in our research group] could have greater impact [and be] even more worthwhile […] not just for us, but for the wider RE community’. Rachel commented that reading a research-report from a session she did not attend improved her understanding of the research processes. Jessica felt reassured that, ‘Not every piece of research runs smoothly. There are hiccups and delays along the way and this is ok, no need to panic’. These data show that teachers’ perceptions of themselves as teacher-researchers were improved by meeting other RE teachers engaged in research, by sharing experiences and processes of doing research and by realising that their own research projects are potentially beneficial to the wider RE community.

Discussion

Biesta and Tedder (2007, 139) argue that novel contexts spark high agency. The COP established for the project was a novel context and a secure space for participating teachers to explore their emerging researcher-identities. They also argue that achievement of agency is influenced by ‘economic, cultural and social resources’ (2007, 137). The COP was resourced economically – teachers were funded to attend the sessions at the university and to attend Strictly RE; culturally – educational researchers were invited to our sessions to discuss their research with the teachers, and Strictly RE was culturally enriching; and socially – a fixed time, venue and snacks were provided for teachers’ university sessions that created a social atmosphere, and Strictly RE created opportunities for teachers to network with new colleagues. These novel contexts disrupted teachers’ existing attitudes towards the structures in which they operate, reinvigorated their professional self-belief and began to instil them with confidence as teacher-researchers. Our findings concur that novel contexts have the potential to spark high agency.

Teachers drew on their professional experiences to articulate and critique the restrictive structures within which they work. Practical structures are a paucity of funds and time for critical reflection. Attitudinal structures are RE’s low status compared with other curriculum subjects, Primary teachers’ perceptions of being regarded as low status by others, and the belief that research is difficult. The discussion now evaluates the levels and ways in which teachers’ agency was stimulated to challenge their previous acceptance of these structures by applying the findings to Emirbayer and Mische’s ‘simultaneous agentic orientations’ of iterational, practical-evaluative and projective phases (1998, 963).

Iterational

The iterational phase is interested in how far teachers’ past experiences and existing beliefs remain unchallenged to inform decisions about their present actions and preserve existing structures. Practical structures of paucity of funds and time for reflection are resilient and teachers’ had minimal agency to challenge them. School budgets are tight and unlikely to stretch to funding teachers’ conference attendance and time away from school. School life is busy; teachers’ routine multi-tasking leaves scant time for reflection during the school day and the focus on performativity mitigates against teachers’ future aspirations. Attitudinal structures of others’ low positioning of RE and Primary teaching also remained intact. What changed, however, was teachers’ previous acceptance of these structures. Though they cannot change the frenetic nature of school life, teachers came to appreciate the value of ‘timeout’ for reflection and are likely to prioritise this if future opportunities arise. Their new allegiance with the national RE community and improved knowledge empowered them to openly champion RE and challenge accusations of its low status. They engaged in powerful discourses of self-affirmation and validation, which manifested into actions of leadership for example by leading CPD, to reverse their previously passive acceptance of narratives about Primary teaching as low status. At the outset of the project teachers had not yet carved out a researcher identity and most were tentative about their ability to undertake research. As the project progressed they learned more about research skills, understood their own capabilities as researchers and accepted the value of research on their own practice. Engaging with other teacher-researchers at Strictly RE normalised practitioner-research proving to them that it was well within their scope. Whilst teachers could not demolish restrictive structures, the data shows they demonstrated high agency in re-evaluating their relationships with these structures by switching from resignation about negative attitudes to positive affirmation of RE, Primary teaching and research. Teachers’ attendance at Strictly RE accelerated these attitudinal changes.

Practical-evaluative

The practical-evaluative phase is interested in the judgements teachers made to problematise their current situation and make informed choices to change it. Initially some of the teachers were insecure about their membership to the national RE community. By the end of the conference their legitimate membership was self-affirmed through their positive interactions with the community and through knowledge exchange. This transition from outsider to insider impacted teachers’ professional self-validation. It triggered critical self-distancing that enabled self-reflection in the light of being appreciated by peers with similar experiences and a shared appreciation of RE (Emirbayer and Mische 1998, 994). This disarmed their attitudinal structure of low self-worth and led them instead to claim and celebrate their professional expertise and its value to RE. This radical repositioning is indicative of high-agency stimulated by the novel context and ecology of the conference (Biesta and Tedder 2007, 136–137).

Projective

The projective phase is interested in how far teachers’ aspirations to be teacher-researchers stimulated reflexive thinking leading them to reconfigure their previous beliefs and actions and not repeat past routines into the future. At Strictly RE teachers gained confidence that their individual research projects were useful to RE through the affirmation of other delegates. The normalisation of teachers as researchers boosted teachers’ confidence in their own abilities as potential teacher-researchers. The collegial context of the conference improved teachers’ confidence to be more self-critical and open to scrutiny, which opened new ways of seeing, being and acting as professional teacher-researchers rather than simply applying externally generated knowledge (Orland-Barak and Tillema 2006). Having their own ideas validated by others bonded the teachers as part of a wider group of professionals (Canrinus et al. 2011). Strictly RE sharpened teachers’ aspirations for their own research because they became committed to the importance of their projects for RE, better informed about resources to draw on, more confident about dissemination, and reassured that their findings would be well received by the RE community. Getting to this point required the type of reflexive thinking that Emirbayer & Mische link to high-agency because it disrupted teachers’ previous ‘taken for granted’ habits and beliefs (1998, 994) that research was difficult and not for them, to a revised position in which they took pride and ownership of their research projects and could imagine a future in which they were accomplished teacher-researchers (ibid. 984).

Conclusion

This paper posed two research questions: (i) What role, if any, did attending Strictly RE play in increasing teachers’ professional identity and agency? (ii) Were teachers more confident about their role as researchers through exploring new possibilities of thought and action, and if so how?

The data indicates that attending Strictly RE increased teachers’ professional identity and agency. As a novel context of action (Biesta and Tedder 2007, 136) it disrupted teachers’ negative feelings of self-worth and provided stimulus for critical self-reflection culminating in teachers’ self-validation through recognition of their experience and expertise. The democratic, discursive and supportive ethos of the conference enabled teachers to reflect differently on their practice and appreciate their skills and expertise, which they saw reflected back at them by the wider community; a community to which they came to accept their legitimate membership. This echoes the literature on the value of conference attendance in promoting both cognitive and social changes (e.g. Baumfield 2016; Edelheim et al. 2018; de Vries and Pieters 2007). It also confirms other findings that conferences promote conversations as part of a community of scholarship that generated feelings of belonging when research influenced practice, and practice influenced research reciprocally (e.g. Graham and Kormanik 2004; Oester et al. 2017).

It is also evident that Strictly RE opened teachers up to new possibilities of thought and action that improved their confidence about their roles as researchers. At the conference there was a ‘focus on the dialectic of theory and practice as praxis’ (Stenhouse 1983, 214) because teachers’ existing ways of working were interrogated, and practice was made relevant to theory. The communal validation of the importance of RE and how it can and should be taught well, played a strong role in teachers’ feelings of professional validation, which in turn enabled them to explore new possibilities of thought and action in their practice. This rejuvenation through self-validation led to a reconstruction of teachers’ theorising of their purposes and practices in which they came to recognise the value of research for teaching, particularly through theory being tested in practice and vice versa, and then evolving. The conference ecology (Biesta and Tedder 2007, 136-137) stimulated teacher agency in their researcher identities in ways that became increasingly explicit to these teachers through their processes of reflection and meaning making. Research ceased to belong only to the domains of others, but was now feasible, relevant and purposeful within their own professionalism.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The research reported on in this paper was supported by a grant from Culham St Gabriel’s Trust.

Notes on contributors

Emma Salter

Dr Emma Salter is a senior lecturer in Education at the School of Education, University of Huddersfield, UK.

Prof Lyn Tett

Dr Prof Lyn Tett is a Professor Emerita at the School of Education, University of Huddersfield, UK.