The Islamic University- Gaza Deanery of Higher Education Faculty of ...

(Muijs and Lindsy, 2005, p.1), and" it is typified by conceptual vagueness" (Fraser et al.2007, p. 155)The difficulty of finding an agreed upon clear cut definition of INSET may be due to theunlimited number of terms used to describe this concept. Neil (1986, p. 58) made a list ofthese terms which are associated with INSET including terms as Inservice Education,Curriculum Innovation, Organizational Renewal, Staff Development, and ContinuingTeacher Education.Despite the problem of INSET conceptualization, it may seem quite clear that there are twomain trends dominating these concepts, a traditional trend and a more innovative one as willbe discussed below.2.1.1 Traditional TrendThe traditional trend of INSET was prevalent since 1960 to 1990. It confines INSET toattending one-shot formal training sessions. These sessions aim to fix identified gaps orshortages in teachers‟ skills and expertise.Several researchers show that even teachers themselves are captured with such traditionaltrend. They always equate INSET with short training workshops (Bolam et al., 1995; Hustleret al., 2003; and Boyle et al., 2003). Accordingly, traditional INSET was perceived in theform of training sessions carried out for a few days of the school year. Teachers were chosenpreviously and pulled off from their classrooms into training centers after a long and hardschool day, to be lectured on areas mainly out of their concerns and away from their harshrealities. When these training sessions are over, teachers were sent back to their unchangedrealities without any chance for getting support in applying whatever skills or knowledgemay be acquired (Guskey, 2002, p. 20-22).Therefore, it seems that many educators called for a complete rejection of the traditionaltrend of INSET. In the last two decades, researchers have cautioned against working under16