Teacher Learning in a Community of Practice: A Case Study of ...

The subsequent response was to create a policy characterised by 'surveillance and
regulation' of teachers' work. He describes teacher education policy change as
'correcting teacher deficit' and draws attention to the tensions between greater
surveillance ofthe work ofteachers and greater teacher autonomy (ibid.).
Changing roles ofteachers were also manifested in Curriculum 2005. C200S is
characterised by a strongly learner-centred approach, with learners expected to construct
knowledge, skills and values. The role ofthe teacher is diminished to that offacilitator of
learning, a phenomenon that was likely to create a tension between teachers' traditional
roles and the new expectations. Problems associated with the marginalisation ofteachers
and the changing roles ofeducators have been well documented (e.g. see Muller 2000;
Jansen and Christie 1999). The NSE and the New Revised National Curriculum
Statement (RNCS) for grades R-9 in South Africa signalled the need for both short-term
and long-term teacher development (DoE, 2001).
1.3.3 The challenges of teacher development in a changing South Africa
In the period 2001 to 2003, the Department ofEducation's chiefpriority was in-service
and not pre-service teacher education. This was attributed to the staggering statistic that
approximately 80 000 teachers were not professionally qualified (Parker 2002). The need
for continuing professional development was further emphasised by the Curriculum 2005
Review Report. The report mooted the need for a comprehensive programme for the re­
training of teachers to implement Outcomes-Based Education. A 'mechanism' or model
had to be developed that could provide education, training and development to more than
300 000 educators. The challenge was to decide on the most efficient and effective
teacher development strategies. Poorly designed teacher development initiatives resulted
in what Parker (2002) refers to as 'systemic fatigue', where "(t)eachers end up attending
weekly 'training' workshops, which are not co-ordinated, or ofparticular relevance and
serve more to disrupt teaching than develop it" (ibid.:2S).
21