University of Leeds , UK
To cite this article: Heather Hodkinson & Phil Hodkinson (2005) Improving schoolteachers'
workplace learning, Research Papers in Education, 20:2, 109-131, DOI: 10.1080/02671520500077921
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02671520500077921
This paper is set in the context where there is a policy emphasis on teacher learning and development in a number of countries as a means towards school improvement. It reports on a longitudinal research project about the workplace learning of English secondary school teachers, carried out
between 2000 and 2003. This was part of a Teaching and Learning Research Programme network
of projects looking at learning in a variety of workplaces. The paper contrasts some key features in
the teacher development and workplace learning literatures, which highlight different understandings of learningas acquisition, participation and/or construction. We argue that insights from the
literature and the research, including insights from other projects in the network, enhance our
understanding of teacher learning. The paper describes some of the main ways in which experienced teachers learn, and then identifies three dimensions which interact in influencing the nature
of that learning. The dimensions are: the dispositions of the individual teacher; the practices and
cultures of the subject departments; and the management and regulatory frameworks, at school
and national policy levels. Based upon the findings, we argue that current policy approaches to
teacher development in the UK are over-focused on the acquisition of measurable learning
outcomes, short-term gains, and priorities that are external to the teachers. They also assume and
strive for impossible and counterproductive universality of approach. Instead, our findings suggest
that teacher learning is best improved through a strategy that increases learning opportunities, and
enhances the likelihood that teaches will want to take up those opportunities. This can be done
through the construction of more expansive learning environments for teachers. We examine
briefly some barriers to this approach, and give some suggestions of what could be done.
111
113
but perhaps especially teacher development (Zeichner, 1994), saw this corpus of
work as a means of escaping technically rational assumptions of planned learning.
More recently, writers within both literatures have been more critical of Schns
work. For example, Day (1999) argues that reflection-in-action is too restrictive as a
basis for teacher development, that reflection is never entirely rational, and that even
reflection-on-action lacks a necessary critical edge, that comes best from external
sources. Beckett and Hager (2002), writing about workplace learning, argue that
reflection is a predominantly backward looking activity, and is too cerebral a concept.
They argue that what they prefer to term judgement making is embodied. That is,
it entails emotion and practice as well as reason. It also involves a combination of
feedback (reflection) and feedforwardanticipation. What these literatures share is a
view of the learner as a holistic embodied person, for whom learning is essentially a
matter of construction (Hager, in press). That is, learning is essentially concerned
with changing the learnerconstructing a developing and hopefully improving
teacher through engagement with the process of learning.
In moving beyond reflection, both literatures are also striving to move beyond
purely individual views of learning. This is less well developed in the teacher development literature, but some clear pointers have been established. Hargreaves (1992,
1994) explored ways in which different types of school culture influenced teacher
development. He came down clearly in favour of collaborative cultures as providing
the richest developmental opportunities, but stressed that they could not be
contrived. Day (1999) builds upon Hargreavess work, arguing that school culture
provides positive or negative support for its teachers learning (1999, p. 77) and goes
on to advocate the value of networks, in facilitating the development of the professional self. Harris (2001) also shows that departmental cultures are significant in
influencing teacher development. However, there remains a tendency to see learning
as an essentially individual constructive act, albeit one that is strongly enhanced
by collaboration and by external contacts. Day (1999, p. 36) shows that Many
researchers have emphasised that teachers have a store of personal and practical
knowledge which is shaped by past experiences; and that making this explicit is a
means by which teachers can take control of their development. He argues that both
action research and a narrative approach can help in such a constructive process,
though both have their limitations. Retallick (1999) advocates the use of portfolios,
to recognise and enhance individual teachers ongoing learning.
However, none of these writers fully explores the processual links between culture
and learning. This may be partly because the teacher literature focuses on developmenteither as personal professional growth (Day, 1999; Goodson, 2003) or as
improvement in the practice of teaching (DfEE, 2001; Ingvarson, 2002). However,
there is an extensive literature about the processes of learning in workplaces more
generally. Two key ideas are widely established yet appear to be under-recognised
in the teacher development literature. The first is that learning is an integral part of
everyday workplace practices, though it is richer in some workplaces than others,
and richer for some workers than others. Thus, for example, Lave and Wenger
(1991) talk about learning as integrally involved in belongingthat is, becoming a
115
within a major city. The research data include: documentary evidence from national
bodies, schools, departments and individual teachers on staff development and learning matters; observation within the schools, and particularly of the teachers working
in their departments; and up to three semi-structured interviews with each teacher
about their career history and learning as a teacher. Nineteen teachers, four student
teachers and two senior teachers were directly involved in the research. There were
over 50 transcribed interviews and over 50 days of observation. Fieldwork extended
over six school terms (two years) with alternate terms being spent in each school. We
also held meetings with the schools to seek feedback about emerging findings, half
way through the research and near the end. Each phase of fieldwork was informed by
emerging findings from the previous phase and by insights from our sister projects.
Data was visited and revisited in the light of developing ideas and theory. We
constructed narratives of individual teachers learning (Hodkinson & Hodkinson,
2003, 2004c); analysed the cultures and practices of each department (Hodkinson &
Hodkinson, 2004b), and then considered the data as a whole. This article reports on
the final analysis phase.
Ways in which teachers learn at work
The research revealed many varied and complex forms of teacher learning. For
convenience these have been grouped into individual and collaborative activity, each
of which may or may not have been planned.
Individual learning
Teachers often learn through their own individual teaching activities. In particular
they are constantly adjusting and modifying their practice, in response to actions,
reactions, interactions and activities in the classroom, and in anticipation of
approaching situations. The teachers in our study found this sort of learning very
difficult to describe. Common attempts included You learn most by getting on with
the job and You learn by trial and error. Eraut (1994) distinguishes between the hot
action of the classroom, and cold action, where teachers consider what to do when
outside the immediacy of the classroom. Following Day (1999) and Beckett and
Hager (2002), we see reflection as too limited a means of understanding what such
learning involves. Though they didnt use these terms, what the teachers told us
resembled Beckett and Hagers (2002) embodied judgement making.
As well as ongoing experience, many teachers learn because of imposed external
change, such as new curricula and assessments or new teaching materials. Longaccumulated values, beliefs and practices influence what they do and how they learn.
Feeding in to all of this may be external ideas learned from attendance at courses,
through reading, through use of the Internet, and through noticing things that are
relevant for their work in a variety of situations. For example the art teachers gained
ideas from diverse experiences ranging from visiting an exhibition to observing an
interesting pattern of tree bark in the school grounds. Individual teacher learning can
Collaborative learning
A significant proportion of teacher learning occurs through collaborative interactions
with others. In English secondary schools the subject department is a significant location for such collaboration, and we will revisit this later. Sometimes, collaboration
crosses departmental boundaries, for example through friendships with other teachers, or working groups, like pastoral care teams, which cut across departmental structures. Many teachers value collaborative learning opportunities outside their own
school, but these happen more often for relatively senior staff. Thus the head of
music, as an Advanced Skills Teacher, spent a proportion of his time working with
teachers in other schools, and running courses at a local teachers centre. The head
of art moderated examination course work in other schools. The head of history
valued an annual history teachers conference, both for the subject presentations and
for conversations with other history teachers. Organised courses can be a site for
collaborative as well as individual learning.
Collaborative learning includes conversation and discussion, observing and taking
an interest in what others do, and joint activity. Joint activity can be relatively formal,
for example in working groups tackling new projects, such as curriculum changes.
Often, it is informal. In the art and music departments we observed all the teachers
continually sharing ideas, and requesting and giving advice.
Collaborative learning could involve student teachers. Our data supports the view
that trainees learn well when actively collaborating with more experienced teachers,
both formally and informally. Experienced teachers can also learn through working
with student teachers. Student teachers sometimes bring additional subject expertise
to a department. Also some student teachers brought computer expertise that older
teachers lacked. Observing the different strengths and weaknesses of trainees sometimes triggered reflection and change in experienced teachers.
Planned learning
Whilst much of this learning, be it individual or collaborative, was informal in the sense
that it was ongoing, opportunistic, and incidental, teacher learning could also be
planned. Such planned learning was intentional, and involved undertaking activities
primarily intended for learning something new or different. For example, some of our
sample became examiners for external boards, at least partly to learn to better prepare
their own pupils. At best this learning involved two stagesworking with other examiners, and then working with their own departmental colleagues, sharing and developing their insights. Many teachers attend courses and learning activities, short and
117
long, in school or elsewhere. Teachers are fortunate in comparison with many other
workers in that such courses are seen as a normal if occasional part of their work activity. In the best circumstances a course can provide stimulation or new ideas which
may allow development beyond the specifics of everyday practice (Day, 1999). On the
other hand teachers frequently told us of short courses they had found a waste of time.
Our data leads to the following observations about courses, which are reflected in the
work of Hustler et al. (2003), Retallick et al. (1999), Day (1999) and others.
Short courses result in effective learning if and when matters raised are taken back
and further developed as part of ongoing practice;
Short courses can be ineffective, if the teachers attending do not personally value
the experience;
Courses outside school premises are valuable in enabling contact and collaboration
with teachers and others in related but different situations;
Courses run by staff within school may provide development opportunities for
those running sessions, but also make other staff aware of expertise within the
school, which they may access later;
Long courses, such as initial training or masters degrees, sometimes have a deep
and lasting influence on the ways in which teachers understand, see and approach
their work.
119
they bring prior knowledge, understanding and skills with them, which can
contribute to their future work and learning;
their dispositions influence the ways in which they construct and take advantage of
opportunities for learning at work;
working and belonging to a school and departmental community contributes to the
developing habitus and sense of identity of the teachers themselves;
the dispositions of individual teachers contribute to the co-production and reproduction of the departmental cultures where they work.
The last two points relate also to our second underlying dimension.
121
123
compliance destroys any real collaboration. The head of the history department, Sam,
faced that problem. He instigated changes (e.g. consolidating rooms and staffing) to
promote more collaborative working, but some of his key staff were strong individualists. Sam eventually concluded that it was important to support individual staff
autonomy rather than to force the issue and cause resentment. Furthermore, there is
a potential downside for the departments with close internal collaboration, if they
become too isolated from other staff in the school. For some IT teachers, an alternative
way to achieve some collaborative learning was through mixing with teachers from
other subjects.
If the significance of these sorts of problems is understood, a radically different
approach to enhancing teacher learning is required. It needs to focus on maximising
the learning potential within the participatory practices of teachers, and recognising
that different teachers will respond differently to the same circumstances, as each
continues to construct his/her own professional habitus. Thus, this approach should
be based on maximising opportunities to learn, incentives to learn and support for
learning, increasing the likelihood that more teachers will pursue learning and learn
more effectively. This is antithetical to dominant views of learning as acquisition
within the audit culture. It means focusing attention not primarily on individual
learner responsibility, on targeted learning needs, or on measured learning outcomes,
but on creating a more expansive learning environment at work.
Expansive and restrictive learning environments for teachers
The concept of expansive and restrictive learning environments was initially developed by Fuller and Unwin (2003, 2004) in one of the other projects in the research
network. They observed considerable differences in the quality of apprentice learning
in different firms in the steel industry. In explaining this, they identified variations in
what they termed the learning environment. The apprentices with the poorest experiences had a learning environment which they defined as restrictive, whilst those with
the best learning had an expansive environment. An expansive learning environment
is one that presents wide-ranging and diverse opportunities to learn, in a culture that
values and supports learning. It increases what Billett (2001b) terms the affordances
for learning at work, whilst also increasing the chances that workers will want to make
the most of those affordances. In the case of the steelworks, this was achieved because
practices in the firm encouraged apprentices to take their learning seriously. Apprenticeship, including time spent learning in a local college, was valued by experienced
workers and managers who had themselves gone through the same process. This
culture of learning support had been established over a long period of time. The
college tutor responsible for external courses maintained close contact with the
company. There was mutual trust. In addition, the firm organised a varied
programme for its apprentices. As well as the off the job college course, there was
built-in experience of working in different departments in the firm, an example of
what Fuller and Unwin (2003, 2004) term boundary crossingmoving out of your
own familiar patch to learn by engaging in a different environment.
<<<EXPANSIVE
Close collaborative working
Colleagues mutually supportive in
enhancing teacher learning
An explicit focus on teacher learning, as a
dimension of normal working practices
Supported opportunities for personal
development that goes beyond school or
government priorities
Out of school educational opportunities
including time to stand back, reflect and
think differently
Opportunities to integrate off the job
learning into everyday practice
Opportunities to participate in more than
one working group
Opportunity to extend professional
identity through boundary crossing into
other departments, school activities,
schools and beyond.
Support for local variation in ways of
working and learning for teachers and
work groups.
Teachers use a wide range of learning
opportunities
Figure 1.
RESTRICTIVE>>>
Isolated, individualist working
Colleagues obstruct or do not support
each others learning
No explicit focus on teacher learning,
except to meet crises or imposed
initiatives
Teacher learning mainly strategic
compliance with government or school
agendas
Few out of school educational
opportunities, only narrow, short training
programmes
No opportunity to integrate off the job
learning
Work restricted to home departmental
teams within one school
Opportunities for boundary crossing only
come with a job change.
125
ideal-types, it more accurately represents a series of continua. The teachers, departments and schools in our study lay at various intermediate stages of the various criteria,
some more consistently towards the expansive end. However, we could readily identify
degrees of all the listed types of restrictiveness. It would be difficult, sometimes
impractical, and occasionally inappropriate, to be completely expansive in a working
school, as teacher learning priorities can cut across other school priorities. In practice,
most schools, departments and teachers will be able to achieve a more expansive environment in relation to some criteria, and less with others. There will be circumstances
where it would be counterproductive to push too hard for some expansive features,
as with the history department and collaboration. Furthermore, there may be circumstances where two expansive dimensions are partly contradictory. There will always
be restrictions, but the aim is to maximise expansion as far as is possible.
Some restrictive elements arise from the nature of English secondary teaching as a
job, as it is currently configured. The emphasis in most schools is on individual teachers working in their own closed classrooms, where much learning and development
can take place through hot or cold embodied judgement making (Beckett & Hager,
2002), though the learning may not be consciously recognised at the time. This
setting does not encourage making the teacher learning explicit, without additional
activity, such as the use of portfolios or reflective logs (Retallick, 1999). Nor does it
encourage sharing with and learning from others and broadening the scope of the
learning (Day, 1999). In English secondary schools opportunities to work with others
beyond specific subject or responsibility groups are limited. Thus there are few
chances for the teachers to cross boundaries to work with teachers of other subjects
in their own schools or to work with fellow subject specialists out of school. Another
crucial factor is the lack of time for teachers to take part in activities outside their
lessons and outside their schools, even to stand back and take stock of situations, or
to try to apply changes in practice. Managers and teachers both recognise that in
maintaining quality day-to-day learning experiences for the pupils, the use of substitute teachers is rarely beneficial, and thus neither wants too much time out.
Other problems are rooted more directly in current English policy and management approaches, and therefore could be addressed, though this would require a
cultural and political change. In particular, the over-emphasis on short-term and
measurable learning activity is restrictive, as is the over-emphasis on school and
government learning priorities at the expense of those of the teachers themselves.
The principles set out in the English governments (DfEE, 2001) strategy document sound encouragingly in tune with our expansive environment, and the promises
of additional funding ought to help provide time and space for teacher development.
However closer inspection of the intended allocation of the funding reveals that for
much of it there is a lack of flexibility, with the money being tied to audited national
developmental requirements with only limited attempts to link these to teachers individual preferences, or to recognise either long-term learning or learning that cannot
be easily measured.
As with other workplaces, the learning of the staff (in this case, teachers) is necessarily secondary to the prime productive activity of the firm (in this case teaching
pupils). This fact, combined with continual pressure on scarce resources, means that
some changes that might be beneficial for teacher learning will be difficult to accommodate. However, some of the considerable resources currently devoted to teacher
learning might be more effectively spent. If there is a will in the system to further
enhance teacher learning, actions to increase the expansiveness of learning environments can be taken at a variety of levels. Though gains will be greatest when several
levels of activity are working in harmony, even small, localised changes at one level
can result in some benefits. In what follows, we give some brief illustrative examples
of the sorts of action that could be taken.
Possible actions to increase the expansiveness of teachers learning
environments
Individual teachers
As teachers themselves are significant constitutive parts of the environment where
they work, there are things they can do, individually or in collaboration with
colleagues, to help increase the expansiveness of their learning environments. All of
the teachers in our study learned in effective ways, but some used a far wider repertoire of approaches than others. We found many examples of dedication to personal
and professional growth and development, and to mutual support of colleagues.
Others went further, looking to learn through mentoring others, and through foregrounding their own learning, helping create supportive conditions for colleagues.
Others looked for ways to boundary cross within and beyond the school, though
they did not use that term, engaging with other teachers, groups and departments.
Some engaged with longer courses, which could entail action research, but such
opportunities were rare. Most teachers can do some of these sorts of things, provided
other aspects of the environment are favourable. However, much depends upon the
status, career ambitions, identity and self-perception of the teacher. These factors are
also related to contextual issues such as home and family life, age and career stage,
national and school structures of career progression and salary, and the esteem of
specific teachers in the particular school, and of teachers more generally in the wider
community.
The department
Subject departments should regard teacher learning as one of their explicit purposes,
integrated into the continual improvement of their practices. Developing significant
informal contacts, exchanges and discussions, access to each others lessons and work,
team-teaching and team working to meet a specific problem or target are all potentially
effective approaches. However, allowing for individual differences in disposition,
departments must balance the desirability for close collaborative working, with the
preferences of some teachers to work more independently. Some departments could
do more to help and encourage members to develop collaborative links elsewhere.
127
There is no reason in principle why collaborative working and learning within the
department should preclude boundary crossing. Some of the teachers in our two
collaborative departments had developed significant ways of working especially with
departments in other schools.
The school
Schools can do several things to move closer to an expansive learning environment
for teachers. Management at all levels can set an example and demonstrate that they
value teacher learning. There needs to be strategic planning for the development and
support of an expansive learning environment. This needs to recognise the significance of everyday teaching practices as learning. Opportunities for collaborative
learning, boundary crossing and working in different teams can be constructed.
Social procedures and physical structures can encourage teams of teachers, such as
subject departments, to work closely together and spend non teaching time together
providing opportunities for positive learning and development. Whilst implementing
government policy and fulfilling school development objectives are important, it can
be beneficial to support teacher learning which does not directly fulfil these requirements. The five official staff development days in English schools are core time for
(often more formal) teacher learning but they could be used flexibly, giving teachers
space to work on learning that matters to them, as well as highlighting school priorities. For example, staff could be excused attendance from some of them, in lieu of
other engagement with learning in their own time. Currently, longer off-site educational experiences are rare, but highly valued. Managers need to look for imaginative
ways to support such opportunities, which may allow teachers to interrogate aspects
of their values, purposes and practices and the personal, institutional and policy
contexts which influence these (Day, 1999, p. 31).
The government
Government policies can make a major difference to the expansiveness of teachers
learning environments, through modifying the regulation of their working practices.
However, teacher learning is only one educational policy concern, and would always
have to be set against other priorities for action and for funding. One possible change
would be to greatly reduce the focus on restricted, pre-specified learning objectives,
instead targeting funds and policies towards helping schools enhance teacher learning
through everyday working practices. Beyond the school, support for attendance on
long courses for teachers would allow them to engage with new ideas, and facilitate
possible shifts in disposition. From the perspective of enhancing teacher learning, not
all such courses need formal certification. The enrichment of, say, masters-level
thinking and activity is important in its own right. Another source of learning and
enrichment can be working for short spells in and with schools and departments other
than their own. If spare teaching capacity could be funded in schools it would allow
educational leave and periods of working in other schools to happen.
Conclusion
In this article we have argued that in order to understand teacher learning better,
and then to improve it, it is helpful to adopt a combination of two positions. From
the workplace learning literature, comes the focus on learning through participation
in everyday practices. From the teacher development literature, comes the focus on
learning as a predominantly individual process of construction. One way of
combining these approaches lies in the concept of expansive and restrictive learning
environments. By making the learning environments of teachers more expansive, it
is possible to increase the potential for effective learning, and the likelihood that
more teachers will avail themselves of the opportunities that are available. The
suggestions made above are not the only ways to do this. They illustrate some
aspects of what an expansive approach to improving teacher learning might look
like, if it were adopted. This would mean some changes in the ways that teachers
work, for their work is the major source of their learning. It would mean that planning and activity should be responsive to the micro-conditions of specific working
groups or contexts, as well as to macro influences. To be successful, it will need to
pay attention to power differentials and workplace inequalities, as well as individual
dispositions. Our research suggests that such approaches will only have a partial
impact, for any changes introduced will affect different teachers in different ways,
and will result in differing responses from them. However, this partiality is true for
all approaches to teacher learning. Indeed, perhaps the strongest conclusion to be
drawn from current research it is that efforts to improve teacher learning will
always impact unevenly, across schools, departments and individual teachers. In
that situation, rather than imposing targets and compulsory training experiences, a
more helpful approach is to encourage and facilitate teacher learning through and
beyond work. That is, construct an environment where such learning and associated teacher professionalism can flourish.
Note
1.
The Research Network Improving Incentives for Learning in the Workplace was funded by
the Economic and Social Research Council, as part of the Teaching and Learning Research
Programme: award number L139251005. The network consisted of five projects:
Regulatory structures and access to learning: case studies in social care and cleaning, H. Rainbird,
University College Northampton and A. Munro, Napier University.
Recognition of tacit skills and knowledge in work re-entry, K. Evans and N. Kersch, University of
London, Institute of Education.
The workplace as a site for learning for mature workers and new entrants: opportunities and barriers in
small and medium-sized enterprises, L. Unwin and A. Fuller, University of Leicester.
An exploration of the nature of apprenticeship in an advanced economy, P. Senker, University
College Northampton.
The school as a site for workbased learning, P. Hodkinson and H. Hodkinson, University of Leeds.
Network website: http://www.tlrp.org/project%20sites/IILW/index.htm.
129
References
Argyris, C. & Schon, D. A. (1974) Theory in practice: increasing professional effectiveness (San Francisco,
CA, Jossey-Bass).
Argyris, C. & Schon, D. A. (1978) Organisational learning: a theory of action perspective (Reading,
MA, Addison-Wesley).
Avis, J., Bloomer, M., Esland, G., Gleeson, D. & Hodkinson, P. (1996) Knowledge and nationhood:
education, politics and work (London, Cassell).
Beckett, D. & Hager, P. (2002) Life, work and learning: practice in postmodernity (London,
Routledge).
Bereiter, C. (2002) Education and the mind in the knowledge age (London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).
Billett, S. (2001a) Learning in the workplace: strategies for effective practice (Crows Nest, Australia,
Allen & Unwin).
Billett, S. (2001b) Learning through working life: interdependencies at work, Studies in Continuing
Education, 23(1), 1935.
Billett, S. (2002) Critiquing workplace learning discourses: participation and continuity at work,
Studies in the Education of Adults, 34(1), 5667.
Billett, S. (2004) Learning through work: workplace participatory practices, in: H. Rainbird, A.
Fuller & A. Munro (Eds) Workplace learning in context (London, Routledge).
Bloomer, M. & Hodkinson, P. (2000) Learning careers: continuity and change in young peoples
dispositions to learning, British Journal of Educational Studies, 26(5), 583598.
Bourdieu, P. & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992) An invitation to reflexive sociology (Cambridge, Polity
Press).
Day, C. (1999) Developing teachers: the challenge of lifelong learning (London, Falmer Press).
Department of Education and Science (1972) The education and training of teachers (The James
Report) (London, Her Majestys Stationery Office).
Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (2000) Performance management in schools
performance management framework (DfEE 0051/2000) (London, Her Majestys Stationery
Office).
Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (2001) Learning and teaching: a strategy for
professional development (DfEE 0071/2001) (London, Her Majestys Stationery Office).
Engestrm, Y. (1984) Students conceptions and textbook presentations of the movement of the
moon: a study in the manufacture of misconceptions, in: H. Nielsen & P. V. Thompsen (Eds)
Fysik I skolen: Problemer og perspectiver (Aarhus, Aarhus Universitet, Det Frysiske Institut).
Engestrm, Y. (1999) Activity theory and individual and social transformation, in: Y. Engestrm,
R. Miettinen & R. Punamaki (Eds) Perspectives on activity theory (Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press).
Engestrm, Y. (2001) Expansive learning at work: towards an activity-theoretical reconceptualisation, Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133156.
Engestrm, Y. (2004) The new generation of expertise: seven theses, in: H. Rainbird, A. Fuller &
A. Munro (Eds) Workplace learning in context (London, Routledge).
Eraut, M. (1994) Developing professional knowledge and competence (London, Falmer Press).
Fuller, A. & Unwin, L. (2003) Learning as apprentices in the contemporary UK workplace: creating
and managing expansive and restrictive participation, Journal of Education and Work, 16(4),
407426.
Fuller, A. & Unwin, L. (2004) Expansive learning environments: integrating organizational and
personal development, in: H. Rainbird, A. Fuller & A. Munro (Eds) Workplace learning in
context (London, Routledge).
Goodson, I. F. (2003) Professional knowledge, professional lives: studies in education and change
(Maidenhead, Open University Press).
131