metadata: authors: 0: author: Burke,Andrew
1: author: Cuadra,Ernesto Pancracio
2: author: Mahon,Tony
3: author: Moreno Olmedilla,Juan Manuel
4: author: Thacker,Simon
count: West Bank and Gaza
docna: 0: docna: Transforming Teacher Education in the West
            Bank and Gaza : Policy Implications for Developing Countries
docty: Policy Research Working Paper
subtopic: Educational Sciences,Educational Institutions & Facilities,Effective Schools and Teachers,Labor Markets
teratopic: Education,Social Protections and Labor
abstracts: cdata!: This paper provides a comprehensive
            review of the World Bank–supported Teacher Education
            Improvement Project for Grades 1-4 Class Teachers in the
            West Bank and Gaza (2008-19) and has important policy
            implications for similar initiatives in other developing
            economies. A professional development index of teaching
            competences was created and used to redesign, develop,
            implement, and evaluate pre-service and in-service programs
            in line with international good practice. By linking
            pre-service to in-service, the index is innovative in
            capturing the continuum of a teacher's professional
            development. The index as well as all elements of the
            pre-service and in-service programs were developed by
            Palestinians with consultant assistance. This developmental
            process strengthened the capacity of those involved and
            ensured understanding and ownership of outputs. The project
            resulted in an increase of fully qualified teachers from 54
            percent in 2011 to 92 percent in 2018. In 2019, five of six
            university pre-service programs were granted unconditional
            accreditation by representative panels chaired by
            international experts. The project won the United
            Kingdom's prestigious Times Higher Education Award for
            International Impact, 2018 due to its innovative approaches
            and potential for replication in other countries. The model
            of reform developed in the project is currently influencing
            the development of strategies for the coherent and systemic
            reform of teacher education in World Bank–supported projects
            in The Gambia and Zambia.
geo_reg_key: 119229,517191
repnme: repnme: Transforming Teacher Education in the West
            Bank and Gaza : Policy Implications for Developing Countries
display_title: Transforming Teacher Education in
            the West Bank and Gaza : Policy Implications for Developing Countries
listing_relative_url: /research/2020/07/32264633/transforming-teacher-education-west-bank-gaza-policy-implications-developing-countries
topicv3: Teachers Management m1326119 1523,Education, Skills Development and Labor
            Market m1326135 1484,Teacher Training m1326786 1532,Education m1327048 470,Jobs m1503931 2670
publishtoextweb_dt: 2020-07-22T00:00:00Z
historic_topic: Education,Social Protections and Labor
origu: Education MNA (HMNED)
no_of_pages: 43
author_keys: 0: author_key: 743557
1: author_key: 94706
2: author_key: 658955
3: author_key: 682500
model_extractions: Policy Research Working Paper 9328 Transforming Teacher Education in the West Bank and Gaza Policy Implications for Developing Countries _Andrew Burke Ernesto Cuadra Tony Mahon Juan Manuel Moreno Simon Thacker_ Education Global Practice July 2020
Policy Research Working Paper 9328

# **Abstract**

This paper provides a comprehensive review of the World Bank–supported Teacher Education Improvement Project for Grades 1– 4 Class Teachers in the West Bank and Gaza (2008–19) and has important policy implications for similar initiatives in other developing economies. A professional development index of teaching competences was created and used to redesign, develop, implement, and evaluate pre-service and in-service programs in line with international good practice. By linking pre-service to in-service, the index is innovative in capturing the continuum of a teacher’s professional development. The index as well as all elements of the pre-service and in-service programs were developed by Palestinians with consultant assistance. This developmental process strengthened the capacity of those involved and ensured understanding and ownership of outputs. The project resulted in an increase of fully qualified teachers from 54 percent in 2011 to 92 percent in 2018. In 2019, five of six university pre-service programs were granted unconditional accreditation by representative panels chaired by international experts. The project won the United Kingdom’s prestigious Times Higher Education Award for International Impact, 2018 due to its innovative approaches and potential for replication in other countries. The model of reform developed in the project is currently influencing the development of strategies for the coherent and systemic reform of teacher education in World Bank– supported projects in The Gambia and Zambia.

This paper is a product of the Education Global Practice. It is part of a larger effort by the World Bank to provide open access to its research and make a contribution to development policy discussions around the world. Policy Research Working Papers are also posted on the Web at http://www.worldbank.org/prwp. The authors may be contacted at sthacker@worldbank.org.

_The Policy Research Working Paper Series disseminates the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development issues. An objective of the series is to get the findings out quickly, even if the presentations are less than fully polished. The papers carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent._ Produced by the Research Support Team
# **Transforming Teacher Education in the West Bank and Gaza: Policy Implications for Developing Countries**

Andrew Burke<sup>a</sup> , Dublin City University, Ireland Ernesto Cuadra<sup>b</sup> , World Bank Tony Mahon<sup>c</sup> , Canterbury Christ Church University, United Kingdom Juan Manuel Moreno<sup>d</sup> , World Bank Simon Thacker<sup>e</sup> , World Bank<sup>1</sup>

**JEL codes:** I20, I21, I23, I25, I28

**Keywords:** Teacher education; Results-based reform; Development; Capacity development; Competency framework; Pedagogical Content Knowledge.

1 a Teacher education consultant for TEIP (2008-2019) on behalf of the World Bank <andrew.burke@dcu.ie>. b c Task Team Team Leader for the project 2008-2014 <u><mark>ernesto.p.cuadra@gmail.com.</mark></u> Lead external consultant for TEIP in contract with the Ministry of Education and Higher Education, The West Bank and Gaza <u><j.mahon1344@canterbury.ac.uk> .</u><sup>d</sup> Task Team Leader for the project 2015-2019 <u><mark><jmoreno@worldbank.org></mark></u> . eEducation specialist for TEIP <u><mark><sthacker@worldbank.org></mark></u> .
# **Introduction**<sup>**23**</sup>

In recent decades teachers, teacher education and related research have been receiving an unprecedented level of attention (Cochran-Smith and Villegas 2015; Cochran-Smith et al. 2015). This trend has impacted developing and developed countries. It reflects the established connection between teacher quality and improved educational outcomes, a better understanding of how a nation’s economic fortunes are linked to the effectiveness of its education system, and an awareness that every year of schooling can raise earnings by an estimated 10 percent annually over a lifetime (Hargreaves 2003; Barber and Mourshed 2010; Hanushek and Rivkin 2010; Psacharopoulos and Patrinos 2018; World Bank 2018, 2019).

These developments reflect significant advances in the knowledge base of teaching, changing conceptions of how students learn and what they need to know to thrive in knowledge economies (Patrinos 2020), more in-depth understanding of the complexity of the teacher’s role (Shulman 1987a), and of the onus on teachers to develop skills to deal with diverse student populations and growing social and school inequality (Aslam et al. 2014).

Despite these advances, the challenges for education systems, schools and teachers are formidable. While access to schools internationally has improved very significantly, in 2018 there were 258 million young people out of school and 260 million in school who could not read. Further, it is estimated that more than half of the world’s ten-year-olds are unable to read and understand a simple text and that there is a learning gap of between 2 and 3 standard deviations between the highest and lowest performing countries, the latter being mostly in the low-income bracket (Patrinos and Angrist 2018).

The foregoing developments have been accompanied by increased public demands for higher levels of service from teachers and education systems, greater clarity regarding the rights of students, and stronger demands for the type and level of services required to meet both national and individual students’ needs (Schleicher 2018; Livingston 2019). Globally, there has been an increased emphasis on results-based approaches and verifiable outcomes which, in turn, is leading to a new approach to management in education. In the case of pre-service and in-service teaching education (PRESET and INSET, respectively) this translates into a focus on enhancing teachers’ competences and the use of professional development indices to evaluate them.

> 2 **Acknowledgements:** The following were central to the design, planning and implementation of TEIP and their contributions and insights impacted greatly on the composition of this article: Basri Saleh Smoudi, Deputy Minister of Education and Senior Line Manager for TEIP; Samira Hillis, _Program Leader_ for the World Bank in the West Bank and Gaza; Suha Khalili, Director of the _Project Coordination Unit_ in the Ministry of Education .

> 3 **Abbreviations.  AED** : Assessment and Evaluation Department; **AQAC** : Accreditation and Quality Assurance Commission; **CCCU** : Canterbury Christ Church University; **CK** : Content knowledge; **DSQ** : Directorate General for Supervision and Qualifications; **ICR** : Implementation Completion and Results Report; **INSET** : In-service Education and Training. **LCs** : Learning Circles; **MoEHE** : Ministry of Education and Higher Education; **NIET** : National Institute for Educational Training; **PAD:** Project Appraisal Document; **PCK** : Pedagogical content knowledge; **PRESET** : Pre-service Education and Training. **PTPDI** : Palestinian Teacher Professional Development Index; **RTTI** : Readiness to Teach Index; **TEIP** : Teacher Education Improvement Project; **TES:** Teacher Education Strategy; **UQT** : Under-qualified teacher.
The reform of teacher education in the West Bank and Gaza was conceived, designed, developed and implemented in the context of the foregoing developments. From the early years of this century, the _Palestinian Authority_ and its _Ministry of Education and Higher Education_ (MoEHE), having already achieved high attendance levels, began to focus on ‘quality’ rather than ‘quantity’ in relation to schooling. Because teachers were viewed as major factors in the determination of school effectiveness, it was decided to prioritize the reform of teacher education and to develop a clear roadmap for progression within the teaching profession. To this end, a _Teacher Education Strategy_ (TES) was developed by a broad-based working group on behalf of the MoEHE (2008b). This established new parameters for teacher education and new requirements for teacher recognition/certification.

The MoEHE decided to implement the TES and the Palestinian Authority requested the World Bank to support its implementation. To this end, a dialogue ensued that culminated in the joint preparation of a _Teacher Education Improvement Project_ (TEIP) targeting primary school (grade 1-4) teachers in the West Bank and Gaza. Following two years of detailed planning, the pilot phase of TEIP ran from 2011 to 2015 and, with additional financing, was scaled up from 2015-2019. Component 1 of TEIP focused on the reform of PRESET for grade 1-4 teachers while Component 2, INSET, aimed at enabling under-qualified teachers (UQTs) operating at this level to meet new requirements for certification identified by the TES and mandated by the MoEHE.

This paper will first summarize recent developments in teacher education internationally, which informed the design, development and implementation of TEIP. It will then proceed to describe and evaluate TEIP against those benchmarks. Thereafter, the challenge of sustaining TEIP reforms will be discussed. Finally, ‘lessons learned’, which may benefit other countries contemplating similar reforms in teacher education, will be identified.

# **1. International Background to TEIP**

# _1.1 School effectiveness: The role of teachers_

Cogent research-based evidence, coupled with reviews of education in several countries, has led to increased understanding of the critical role that teachers play in determining school effectiveness. The evidence is mounting that, across the spectrum of high- to low-income countries, teachers are the single most important, within-school influence on student achievement (Wenglinsky 2002; OECD 2005, 2011; Schleicher 2018; World Bank, 2018, 2019). Furthermore, research evidence also indicates that, at both school and college levels, how teachers and lecturers teach is an important determinant of how students learn (Wenglinsky 2002; Beausaert et al. 2013).

In spite of the extensive evidence on teacher impact, policy makers and funding agencies involved in low-income countries have, up to recent times, been slow to recognize this reality and, as a result, have not provided the levels of support required. Teachers and their trainers have been a neglected resource (Lewin and Stuart 2003a, 2003b; Netherlands 2003). However, the realization is dawning that effective school improvement can be made only by working with and through teachers rather than attempting to work around them (see Cochran-Smith and Zeichner 2005). Pasi Sahlberg (2013) summarized current thinking in this regard as follows: 2
- “The quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers”.

- “The most important single factor in improving the quality of education is teachers”.

- “If any children had three great teachers in a row they would soar academically regardless of their racial or economic background.”<sup>4</sup>

If teachers are critical to effective schooling, then teacher education should be a central concern for all ministries of education and relevant funding agencies. While many factors impact education, experts in development education have long argued that, without the reform of teacher education, there will be no effective reform of education and that the pace of reform in the former will determine the speed of change in the latter (Beeby 1966; Torres 1996; Dembélé et al. 2003; Lewin and Stuart 2003; Schleicher 2018).

# _1.2 Evolution of teaching as a profession_

The conceptual basis of teaching and the understanding of learning have changed dramatically over the past century and a half (Burke 1992; Furlong 2013; Cochran-Smith and Villegas, 2015; Patrinos 2020). As a result, teaching has evolved to a point where policy and practice have a more comprehensive, research-informed knowledge base. In addition, the societal contexts in which teachers work have been undergoing dramatic changes putting an onus on teachers (with the assistance of their trainers) to develop levels of understanding and multiplicity of skills required to deal competently with the variety of contexts and student types that they are likely to encounter (Livingston 2014; Cochran-Smith & Villegas 2015; Cochran-Smith et al. 2015).

In light of this, it has become clear: (1) that teaching can now legitimately be viewed as a knowledge-informed professional area requiring well-educated and trained practitioners to deal with the known complexity of learners and learning (Shulman, 1987b, 1998; Hashweh, 2013); (2) that an adequate level of pedagogical expertise cannot be acquired through a short teacher training course and/or by way of apprenticeship alone, though both are common today (Guskey and Yoon 2002). Finally, if professionals trade competence for recognition, as Dreeben (1970) argued, claims to professional recognition on the part of teachers, or members of other professions, whose knowledge/expertise is inadequate and/or out-of-date, can scarcely be sustained.

# _1.3  Evolution of teacher education_

Since professional knowledge is subject to ongoing review and further research-based development, professional education is, of necessity, a career-long ‘work in progress’ as today’s ‘best practice’ is superseded by tomorrow’s better-informed approaches. This challenging reality has major implications for the initial education and ongoing professional development of teachers (Burke 1992). However, there are sharply differing views in this regard.

Supporters of teaching’s claim to professional recognition acknowledge significant and ongoing developments in its knowledge base, accept that the responsibilities of teachers extend beyond the mere teaching of subjects to the development of the whole child/adolescent, along with the inculcation of values (Buber 1965; Brooks 2020). Shulman (1986: 13) argued that the structure and content of teacher education programs should reflect the complex nature of

> 4 Also documented in <mark>Sanders and Rivers (1996).</mark>

3
teaching as it is now understood and focus on providing student teachers with the resources (knowledge, skills and dispositions) for carrying out this activity. This will involve “strategic understanding, the careful confrontation of principles with cases, of general rules with concrete documented events... a dialectic of the general with the particular in which the limits of the former and the boundaries of the latter are explored”. A consensus has emerged among educationalists that, to facilitate such professional development, integrated PRESET programs with extended periods of well-mentored practice (25% of total program time) are required for student teachers (Darling-Hammond 2006) and ample opportunities for practicing teachers to collaborate in _communities of practice_ (Borko, Jacobs and Koellner 2010).

In sharp contrast to the foregoing, others promote a view of teachers as mere ‘classroom technicians’, effectively de-professionalizing teaching and re-constructing teachers as _doers, not thinkers; managers, not scholars; technicians, not intellectuals._ This trend, which emerged in England and some other countries in recent decades, has resulted in the deregulation of teacher education and the emergence of multiple alternative routes into teaching, all of which prioritize on-the-job practical training over the development of theoretical and pedagogical knowledge (Beauchamp et al. 2013: Furlong 2013). As predicted by the _Universities Council for the Education of Teachers_ in the U.K., this narrow, technicist view of teachers and teaching is having a negative impact on the quality of teacher education, the perceived status of teaching, and on teacher recruitment and retention (Goodson 1995; Reynolds 1999; Reid 2001; Furlong 2013). As we will see in Section 4 hereunder, a trend is emerging which counteracts this simplistic view of teaching, acknowledges its multifaceted complexity and reflects this understanding through the development of comprehensive indices of teaching competences which are used systematically to update and upgrade the teaching profession. It is a trend that was central to TEIP, has contributed to the re-professionalization of teaching in the West Bank and Gaza and is informing the same in other countries which are modeling their reforms on approaches developed in TEIP.

# _1.4. Pedagogical content knowledge_

In traditional approaches to teacher education, dichotomies existed between theory and practice and between pedagogy and academic subject-matter. Student teachers learned _Content Knowledge_ (CK) in academic departments and the pedagogy/methodology related to the teaching of that content in education departments (Schwille and Dembélé 2007). As a result, “the typical pre-service program” according to Feiman-Nemser (2001: 1014) was “a collection of unrelated courses and field experiences”. For Shulman (1998), the traditional understanding of teacher training saw it as a matter of acquiring theoretical or ‘actionless’ knowledge about teaching in colleges/universities and applying it subsequently in classrooms. There was a disconnect between the different program components and their integration was left largely to the student teachers.

The most notable attempt to address the dichotomies in traditional approaches to teacher education came with Shulman’s identification of _Pedagogical Content Knowledge_ (PCK) as the missing paradigm in research on teaching (Shulman 1986, 1987b, 1998; Hashweh 2005, 2013). For Shulman, PCK involves the study of subject-matter content and its interaction with pedagogy. This issues in a specialized form of knowledge, or _practical wisdom,_ that distinguishes teachers from others who study the same subject areas but not with a view to teaching them. PCK entails, not only mastery of the content to be taught, but also the 4
_construction_ of a range of personal skills for teaching that content to students by means of illustrations, demonstrations, examples, analogies and other teaching techniques that make the subject comprehensible to others and the development of pedagogical skills to adapt instruction to the varying ability levels and other characteristics of students.

According to Hashweh (2005: 1) PCK is essentially a collection of _Teachers’ Pedagogical Constructions_ - “a form of knowledge that preserves... the wisdom of practice that a teacher acquires when repeatedly teaching a certain topic”. It reflects and grows out of each teacher’s personality, vision and values. PCK is both ‘person specific’ and ‘domain/topic specific’ - specific to each subject and to each teacher of each subject. Each teacher _constructs_ his/her approach to teaching in general and to the teaching of each subject in particular. In reality, teachers _construct_ themselves as _pedagogues_ and, like other professionals, can be expected to continually reconstruct themselves during their careers through reflection on their daily work, research, continuing professional development, and dialogue with colleagues in _communities of practice_ .

Viewed from this perspective, the task of teacher educators is to facilitate and mentor such individualized professional development within the parameters of international good practice, while being cognizant of the inadvisability of trying to _legislate_ for how this is to happen for individual teachers and leaving room for each to ‘ _self-create’._ This requires avoidance of a _one-size-fits-all_ approach to teacher formation. It also necessitates the designing of teacher education programs wherein the various components are integrated around the fulcrum of actual teaching and learning and wherein professional understanding and skills are developed in situations similar to those in which the service will subsequently be provided. It now seems clear that the transition from theory to practice, from college to school, from coursework to classroom, is no longer considered a linear process that trainee professionals can themselves handle.

Developing the professional understanding and wisdom of practice implied in PCK is a slow process which begins in PRESET and continues through Induction and INSET. Berliner (1987) estimated that to mature as a teaching professional takes 5-7 years while Sahlberg’s (2013) estimate for achieving professional mastery is 10,000 hours of practice. Hilton and Southgate (2007) make a similar argument regarding the professional development of medics and regard medical personnel as ‘proto-professionals’ until such time as they have acquired the _wisdom of practice_ related to their area.

The dichotomies of traditional teacher education were ingrained in the West Bank and Gaza’s PRESET and INSET programs and presented a major challenge for TEIP. In the universities, methods courses were taught in Faculties of Education while subject content was taught in other faculties. There was little contact between the faculties involved. Furthermore, much of the content covered in the academic faculties was irrelevant to what student teachers would later have to teach in schools. To address this fundamental divide, new integrated subject and methods courses, along with curriculum Modules for PRESET and INSET, had to be developed in TEIP incorporating the concept of subject-specific PCK. PCK provided a unifying design principle that was central to the development and effectiveness of TEIP.

_1.5.Maintaining a continuum of professional development from PRESET to Induction to INSET_ 5
There is a consensus that, since professional areas evolve over time in response to research and changing societal demands, initial training should be regarded as the first phase of a developmental continuum that will span the entire working lives of all professionals, including teachers (Dewey 1904; Conway et al. 2009; OECD 2011; Teaching Council, Ireland 2011; Schleicher 2018). Feiman-Nemser (2001) points out, however, that teacher development has suffered from fragmentation and conceptual impoverishment and has lacked the _connective tissue_ to hold things together within and across the different phases of teachers’ professional development. Where PRESET, Induction and INSET operate in isolation from each other (as was largely the case in the West Bank and Gaza before TEIP), establishing a continuum is challenging for both policy makers and teacher educators. However, failing to do so is likely to result in incoherent rationales, policies and practices operating at the different stages of teacher development.

The foregoing overview of international developments highlights the challenges faced by the West Bank and Gaza, a lower-middle income economy in a unique, fragile and conflictaffected situation. It also explicates the rationale underlying TEIP and provides a lens through which (a) to review the planning and implementation of TEIP; (b) to evaluate TEIP reforms against the mirror of international good practice; and (c) to gauge the effectiveness of the intervention.

# **2. Teacher Education Reform in the West Bank and Gaza**

The main aim of MoEHE’s (2008a) _Education Development Strategic Plan 2008-2012_ (EDSP) was the promotion of quality education in all educational institutions in the West Bank and Gaza. The EDSP heralded a shift of emphasis from student access to schools to a focus on the quality of the education being provided in schools.<sup>5</sup> In line with international research findings, the MoEHE viewed the reform of teacher education as a prerequisite to the improvement of teaching and learning in schools. The expert working group established in 2007 issued its report - _The Teacher Education Strategy_ (TES) - in 2008 (MoEHE, 2008b). This was the foundation document on which the planning of TEIP was based. It outlined a roadmap for:

1. The improvement of teacher education programs (PRESET and INSET) and development of the institutions that service them.

2. Better management of teacher education through the regular accreditation of teacher education programs.

3. The updating of requirements for teacher certification/licensing and the provision of programs to enable teachers already in service to meet those requirements.

4. The enhancement of the teaching profession through the establishment of career structures for teachers and the development of standards whereby the profession would be regulated, and teachers evaluated.

> 5 Enrolment in basic education was close to 100%, in secondary 80% and 40% for 18-24-year-olds in tertiary education. However, overcrowding, non-completion of schooling, and decline in the quality of education were serious concerns.

6
The authors of the TES concluded that teacher education programs in the West Bank and Gaza were outdated and over-theoretical, with insufficient focus on the practicalities of actual teaching, inadequate teaching practice arrangements amounting to about four weeks in total, and program delivery methods that helped to perpetuate rather than prevent the continuation of outdated, teacher-centered, transmission-oriented methodologies. In addition, the TES noted duplication of programs across institutions with an overproduction of some teachers (e.g. lower basic) and underproduction of others (e.g. secondary science and mathematics).

Furthermore, there were no standards set to guide the development and assessment of teacher education programs and no licensing system for teachers. Neither a university degree nor a professional teaching qualification was a strict requirement for appointments to teaching posts in Palestinian schools. The TES authors estimated that 50% of practicing teachers did not have a professional teaching qualification while an additional 25% did not have a university degree. In response to a recommendation of the TES, new regulations for teacher certification were introduced by the MoEHE. They require all teachers to have both a university degree and a professional teaching qualification relevant to their teaching subject(s) and the grade level(s) being taught to qualify for a ‘license to practice’. Action was needed since, according to the TES calculations, 75% of all practicing teachers did not meet these newly stipulated certification requirements.

To meet those challenges, the MoEHE established the _Commission for Developing the Teaching Profession_ in 2009. This developed standards for teachers and teacher education programs. The _National Institute for Education and Training_ (NIET) had already been established in 2004 to provide INSET for teachers and an _Accreditation and Quality Assurance Commission_ (AQAC) in 2002 to accredit programs in higher education institutions.

The World Bank agreed to a request from the _Palestinian Authority_ to support the implementation of the TES by grant-aiding the pilot stage of a _Teacher Education Improvement Project_ (TEIP).

# **3. Teacher Education Improvement Project**

# _3.1. Development and ownership of TEIP_

At the commencement of planning for TEIP in 2008 there was “no explicit policy for teacher education in the West Bank and Gaza” (TES: 42). There was a lack of clear-cut regulations on who could work at what level in teaching. According to the TES (2008: 18) “there was no... consensus on the minimum qualifications needed to be able to work as a teacher at specific levels [and] still a debate on whether to qualify one classroom teacher for this [Grade 1-4] level or to introduce some specialization”. In addition, only a 2 percent weighting was given to an educational qualification in the centralized process for teacher selection which allowed “most of the applicants to practice teaching without adequate pre-service qualifications” (TES: 38). The end result was that, at the commencement of TEIP, a large majority of Grade1-4 practitioners were _Subject Teachers_ . Thereafter, the objective was to train/retrain all Grade 1- 4 teachers (with the exception of Religion and English specialists) as _Classroom Teachers_ capable of teaching an integrated program at this level (TES 2008: 20; PAD 2009: 5,6,8; PAD 2015: 5). Midway through the project the MoEHE decided on two types of _Classroom Teacher_ : (a) a single teacher of all subjects in Grades 1 and 2; (b) two teachers in Grades 3 and 4 – one 7
for the Math/Science areas and another for the Arts/Languages areas. As heretofore, specialist teachers would continue teaching Religion and English.

Unlike other time-limited projects in the West Bank and Gaza, the ultimate aim of TEIP was to support the development and effective implementation of the TES as a national policy-based plan for the initial preparation and continuing professional development of grade 1-4 _Class Teachers_ (PAD 2009: 5,15,19).

From the beginning the ownership of TEIP rested with the Minister and the MoEHE. In 2008 Ministry officials and World Bank personnel began developing detailed plans for TEIP and incorporated these in a _Project Appraisal Document_ which was finalized in December 2009 (PAD, 2009 _)_ . Implementation planning continued during 2010. The pilot stage of TEIP commenced in 2011 and terminated in 2015.

At the behest of the Minister for Education, TEIP was to target Grade 1-4 (lower basic) teachers in two components. _Component 1_ was aimed at the reform of PRESET programs, beginning with the _Teaching Practicum_ . _Component 2_ was to provide an INSET program of Modules to upgrade practicing primary teachers who were considered ‘under-qualified’ (UQTs) in light of the new requirements for teacher certification/recognition (PAD 2009:33).

To ensure that TEIP would be managed towards the achievement of results (and not merely the implementation of activities), two separate indices of teaching competences were initially developed – a _Readiness to Teach Index_ (RTTI) for PRESET students and a _Palestinian Teacher Professional Development Index_ (PTPDI) for UQTs on the INSET program. These were later merged into a single PTPDI for all stages of teacher development. The PTPDI was used as the organizing focus to inform development of all other elements of TEIP (see Figure 1). The use of this index of competences in the design, development, evaluation and accreditation of PRESET and INSET programs ensured a focus on verifiable outcomes while also facilitating a results-based approach to educational management.

Comprehensive administrative structures were put in place to support implementation of the detailed plans laid out in the PAD (2009; see Appendix 2 for details). Within the MoEHE, the Deputy Minister assumed the role of line manager for TEIP while the _Directorate for Supervision and Qualifications_ (DSQ) and the _National Institute for Educational Training_ (NIET) were respectively given responsibility for the PRESET and INSET components. _Canterbury Christ Church University_ (CCCU) from the United Kingdom was initially appointed consultant institution for the PRESET component but was later given responsibility for the INSET component as well. Four universities were selected for the PRESET and five for the INSET components. As the pilot phase neared completion, the _Palestinian Authority_ submitted a request to the World Bank for _Additional Financing_ to fund the upscaling of TEIP in a second phase of the project (2015-2019). The request was acceded to and was acted on in time to ensure a seamless transition to the second phase. The aims were to extend TEIP to other universities,<sup>6</sup> to further develop and consolidate the reforms of the pilot phase, and to aid the development of AQAC with a view to program accreditation (PAD 2015: 11-13, 45-47).

> 6 **Universities involved in TEIP** . In the West Bank: Arab American, An Najah, Al Quds, Bethlehem, Birzeit and Hebron Universities; in Gaza: Al Azhar University (in cooperation with Al Aqsa and Islamic Universities). Al Quds Open University joined the project in phase two while Birzeit discontinued.

8
<!-- Start of picture text --> Transforming Teacher Education in Palestine 2008-2019<br>\<br>\ Teacher career 7<br>\ stages /<br>& \ / . —_<br>= Reform of pre- \ / Reform of in- ;<br>3 service degree ay ff service teacher g<br>a programs \ i, training =<br>im oO<br>s Professional Development S<br>s Le ot Index of Teaching [Sa S<br>aA Competences g<br>2 z<br>e Capacity 7 \ Capacity S<br>22 development Pi i development ic]2<br>ea for universityfaculty Fr \ \for in-servicetrainers S<br>/ \<br>7 Teacher \<br>/ evaluation \<br>Stakeholders:<br>Ministry, World Bank, universities, international & local consultants, teachers<br><!-- End of picture text -->
and the Mentor training program was expanded. _Portfolios_ were developed for evidence-based evaluation of _Practicum_ work. The RTTI was finalized. _Handbooks_ were developed for the _Teaching Practicum,_ for _Portfolio_ development and for student-teacher mentoring. With technical assistance from CCCU _,_ academic staff in the participating universities worked collaboratively with the DSQ and two local consultants in developing all of the Modules and instruments.

There was a constant emphasis throughout TEIP implementation on enhancing the pedagogical capacity of all those involved in the PRESET component: ministry and university personnel, DSQ staff, District Supervisors, School Principals and student-teacher mentors. A substantial capacity building program on curriculum and course design was led by CCCU. In addition, CCCU organized _Study Visits_ to their parent institution for critical stakeholders involved in the development and implementation of the PRESET component of TEIP. During these visits all aspects of program development and delivery were discussed in detail and observed at first hand in CCCU and in UK schools. The entire process represented a graduated collaborative, approach to the development of all the components of a reformed PRESET program.

During 2018, and in preparation for accreditation, the final versions of an integrated PRESET program and _Practicum Template_ were negotiated and implemented by the participating universities in consultation with AQAC, DSQ and CCCU. Ten core 3-credit courses in subjectrelated pedagogy were agreed - 5 for Math/Science and 5 for the Arts area. The _Practicum Template_ continued the 80 hours of university-based preparatory course/seminar work and 14 weeks (360 hours) of school-based placements. An innovative model of serial placements across four semesters in years 2-4 of programs was agreed, initially involving one or two days a week and culminating in full-responsibility teaching for a block period of five weeks in the final year. The placements were aligned with the university-based practicum/seminar courses which provided opportunities for student teachers to prepare for and share their experiences, as well as getting feedback and support. Nine credit hours were allotted to the _Teaching Practicum_ . All core subject courses, the practicum courses and school-based placements were designed to provide student teachers with opportunities to develop and demonstrate the range of competences identified in the PTPDI. The aim was to ensure that graduates of accredited PRESET programs would have developed readiness to teach competences and be equipped to adopt an integrated approach to the teaching of all subjects of the Grade 1-4 curriculum (with the exception of Religion and English). Compliance with these agreed arrangements was subsequently mandated by AQAC as a condition for PRESET program accreditation, thereby ensuring sustainability of the reforms.

Program accreditation was a key recommendation of the TES and a key target of TEIP. To ensure that accreditation would be carried out in accordance with recognized international practice, the MoEHE appointed an international consultant to work with AQAC. The consultant assisted in the development of all relevant documentation, the establishment of two accreditation panels, the selection of independent chairpersons, and the preparation of _Self Evaluation Documents_ by faculties of education. Two American professors (experts in both teacher education and accreditation) were appointed as panel chairpersons. In 2019 five of TEIP’s six university PRESET programs were granted unconditional accreditation while the remaining program is confident that it can meet the additional requirements for full accreditation.

10
_3.3. TEIP Component 2: INSET for Under-Qualified Teachers (UQTs)_ The objective of the INSET component of TEIP was to enable UQTs to meet the new requirements for teacher certification and to qualify them as _Class Teachers_ capable of teaching an integrated curriculum in grades 1-4. As explained earlier, at the commencement of TEIP the majority of primary practitioners had been ‘ _Subject Teachers’_ (see Sections 2 and 3.1).

The financial collapse of the Consultant Institution for the INSET component during the pilot phase of TEIP delayed implementation. However, its replacement by CCCU, the consultant institution for the PRESET component, resulted in unanticipated benefits. Having a single consultant institution for both TEIP components ensured coherence, continuity, crossfertilization and effective synergies between the PRESET and INSET components. This was particularly evident in the development of the competency frameworks (RTTI and PTPDI) and the core Curricular Modules.

The original _Modules_ developed by the Consultant Institution for the INSET component proved to be too general in scope and too generic in nature to be of practical use to practicing teachers (Burke and Cuadra 2013). On taking over the consultancy for the INSET component, the CCCU team, working closely with NIET and relevant faculties in the participating universities, proceeded to develop a range of new curriculum and other professional development modules targeting Grade 1-4 teaching and learning. The focus was on integrating the _Content Knowledge_ (CK) and _Pedagogical Content Knowledge_ (CPK) relevant to the actual teaching of each curriculum area at the grade 1-4 level. CCCU also helped in the planning and provision of training for the delivery of those _Modules_ to teachers. _Modules_ were developed for Arabic, Mathematics, Science, English, Special Education Needs and Inclusion (SENI), Cross Curricular Learning and Teaching (CCLT), and Introduction to Key Issues in Teacher Professional Development. Several of these _Modules_ were later adapted for inclusion in the PRESET programs.

There was an impressive level of cooperation between the participating universities in the development of the _Modules_ . Different universities took the lead for individual modules and shared the outcomes of their work with colleagues from the other institutions. Each working team was comprised of subject specialists from the universities, a NIET representative and a subject specialist from CCCU. The teams worked collaboratively to first develop module outlines followed by detailed training plans for module delivery. Through the process of developing, trialing and revising the module outlines and training plans, team members developed an in-depth understanding of the PCK related thereto as well as updated strategies for the training of adults. This _collaborative participatory approach_ constituted a continuous process of pedagogical capacity enhancement for those involved and, in doing so, fulfilled a core objective of TEIP’s reform process.

The UQTs were divided into two groups: _Subject Teachers_ who were upgrading and retraining as _Class Teachers_ , and specialist teachers of English. All UQTs took the following three Modules: (1) ‘Introduction to Key Issues in Teacher Professional Development’ (2) ‘Special Education Needs and Inclusion’ (SENI); (3) ‘Cross Curricular Learning and Teaching’ (CCLT). In addition, those retraining as _Class Teachers_ took the core curriculum modules: Arabic, Mathematics and Science. Specialist teachers of English took three modules in English.

11
The UQT program lasted a full school year for each cohort without any reduction in the teaching loads of participants. An innovative model of training was adopted which involved _Face-to-face Workshops_ with university trainers along with _Learning Circles_ (LCs). The _Workshops_ introduced core areas of CK and PCK relevant to the grade 1-4 curriculum. Directed tasks were assigned to be conducted by UQTs in their own schools. Teachers were guided to reflect upon the process and outcomes of those tasks and to record reflections thereon in their portfolios. The LCs were facilitated by the university trainers. They involved UQTs working in groups, presenting assigned tasks, sharing their reflections, commenting on each other’s work, designing lesson plans, teaching resources, games and other teaching strategies, co-operating in portfolio development, and gaining feedback on all of the foregoing from fellow UQTs and from trainers.

Trainers were uniformly positive regarding the LCs and the opportunities they provided for UQTs to learn from each other. For UQTs the LCs were, in effect, _Communities of Practice_ and they regarded them as the most useful component of the INSET program. An unanticipated, but very positive, outcome of the LCs was the initiative UQTs themselves took in establishing _Facebook_ groups, thereby, creating _Virtual Communities of Practice_ through which there was widespread discussion and distribution of materials and sharing of personal videos of teaching.

As with the case of PRESET, there was a constant emphasis on pedagogical capacity building for all involved in the INSET component – ministry and university personnel, NIET staff, and School Supervisors. In addition, CCCU arranged _Study Visits_ to its UK institution for critical stakeholder personnel during which all aspects of module development and delivery were discussed in detail and observed at first hand both in the university and in UK schools.

# **4. Palestinian Teacher Professional Development Index (PTPDI)**

The development of the _Palestinian Teacher Professional Development Index_ of teaching competences was one of the most significant and influential achievements of TEIP. On one level it reflected the global quest to improve and sustain the quality of teacher workforces and ensure high educational outcomes for all students. These have become vital policy priorities for Ministries of Education around the world (Looney 2011) and have led many education systems to develop teacher professional competency frameworks. Such frameworks describe the types of knowledge, understanding, skills, values and dispositions deemed necessary for effective teaching in the 21<sup>st</sup> century within specific educational contexts. They also reflect an increased emphasis among actors involved in development cooperation on results-based approaches and verifiable competence-related outcomes. In the Palestinian context this approach was instigated by a call in the TES (2008) report for clear standards on the basis of which teachers could be evaluated and around which a career structure for the teaching profession could be established.

Competency models began to become prominent in the 1980s and were initially aimed at fostering improved performance in the workplace, particularly at management level. Early conceptions of the term _competency_ focused on the ability to perform work activities (tasks) to the standards required by particular occupations. Thus, _competency_ was considered to be “an action, behaviour or outcome which the person should be able to demonstrate” (Training Agency, 1988: 5). This definition, however, was criticized as being too narrow since it tended to over-simplify the complex nature of work (Jamil 2015), reduce it to simple tick-box lists of 12
behaviors and take insufficient cognizance of the contexts within which work is performed (McKenna 2004).

Education-related conceptions of _competences_ are no longer based on the earlier discrete skill descriptions of what a person is expected to master. Instead, they have moved towards a more holistic focus on the development and application of _competences_ which, according to Hoskins and Deakin Crick (2010: 122) are grounded in “a complex combination of knowledge, skills, understanding, values, attitudes and desire which lead to effective embodied action in the world in a particular domain”. In the case of teaching, such _competences_ reflect the daily work of teachers within particular contexts (Rychen and Salganik 2001, 2003). Mulder (2001: 76) adds that “competence is the ability of a person or organization to achieve particular levels of performance”, thus indicating that “competence is not a static construct, but may be developed and performed at increasingly complex levels from beginner to advanced, to expert” (MoEHE 2019: 8). It is these recent understandings of _competences_ that have underpinned and informed the development of the PTPDI.

Initially two indices were developed – the RTTI for PRESET students and a separate PTPDI for INSET practicing teachers. After using both for a number of years, all stakeholders agreed that the two indices should be merged to form a single progressive framework to cover all stages of a teacher’s professional development - PRESET, Induction, and INSET – and all steps on the teacher career ladder. Following further development work and trialling, the RTTI was subsumed into a reformed and final version of the PTPDI (MoEHE 2018).

The PTPDI was developed specifically for Palestinian teachers and is the first framework of its kind in the MENA region. It specifies the core competences that teachers should be able to develop and demonstrate in a progressive manner, first as pre-service student teachers, then as new teachers being inducted into the profession, and subsequently as maturing teachers developing their professional competences to the higher levels. Thus, the PTPDI forms a continuum of six competency levels aligned to specific stages of a teacher’s professional development. It makes explicit the increasing expectations of teachers as they advance through the career stages and provides benchmarks for the evaluation and guidance of their professional development. The main features of the PTPDI are presented in Table 1.<sup>9</sup> Table 1. Key features of the PTPDI Competency Framework

|**Level**|**Professional**<br>**Development**<br>**Stage**|**Purpose**|**Key Features**|
|---|---|---|---|
|5|Exceptional<br>competency|Guide teacher<br>continuing<br>professional<br>development|Level 5 competences are very demanding and involve<br>extensive specialist knowledge and skills. It is envisaged<br>that only a small percentage of teachers would reach this<br>level. At Level 5 teachers are not expected to be experts<br>in every aspect of the teaching profession, but are<br>expected to have developed a smaller number of specialist<br>competences (between3 – 8) that enable them to take on<br>leadership roles within their schools and/or districts.|

9 The full PTPDI document can be accessed in the ‘Publications’ section of MoEHE website: www.palpcu.ps. Plans are in train for the publication of a separate article on the PTPDI.

13
|4|Advanced<br>competency|Guide teacher<br>continuing<br>professional<br>development|At Level 4 teachers are expected to be able to demonstrate<br>the majority (75%) of Level 4 competences as well as all<br>the Capable level competences. As these are advanced<br>level competences, to reach this level teachers are<br>expected to have substantial experience and have engaged<br>in extensive professional development.|
|---|---|---|---|
|3|Capable<br>competency|Guide teacher<br>continuing<br>professional<br>development|At Level 3 teachers are expected to be able to demonstrate<br>all the Capable Level competences. These will be<br>developed through increased experience and continuing<br>professional development.|
|2b|Essential<br>competency|Guide teacher<br>continuing<br>professional<br>development<br>Guide induction<br>of new teachers|Levels 2A and 2B overlap conceptually and provide a<br>bridge between the readiness to teach core competences<br>that student teachers are expected to develop by<br>graduation (Level 2A) and the essential competences they<br>are expected to develop during induction as new teachers<br>(Level 2B).|
|2a|Readiness to teach<br>core competency<br>Student Teacher<br>(Practicum 4 & 5)|Judge readiness to<br>teach|These build upon and extend the foundation competences<br>of Level 1. They represent the competences student<br>teachers are expected to achieve upon graduation to<br>indicate their readiness to enter the profession and become<br>a teacher. These will normally be demonstrated during<br>Practicum 4 and 5 Field Experience in schools.|
|1|Readiness to teach<br>foundation<br>competency<br>Student Teacher<br>(Practicum 2 & 3)|Judge readiness to<br>teach|These fundamental basic competences, which student<br>teachers begin to develop during the early years of their<br>degree programme, provide the foundation for their future<br>development as teachers. Students are expected to<br>demonstrate during Practicum 2 and 3 Field Experience in<br>schools.|

- Levels 1 and 2a of the PTPDI specify competences and sub-competences for student teachers to develop during their initial teacher training and to demonstrate their readiness to teach by the time they graduate.  Levels 2a and 2b overlap conceptually and provide a bridge between the competences that student teachers are expected to have developed by graduation (Level 2a) and the competences they are expected to develop during Induction (Level 2B). Level 3 to 5 indicate the competences for serving teachers to develop as they progress throughout their career.

- As new teachers complete and move beyond induction, the PTPDI may be used to identify further continuing professional development needs enter the profession the PTPDI  may be used to identify their further continuing professional development needs initially at Level 2, later at Level 3 and eventually  at the head teacher level.

- The development of teacher competences may be evaluated through the use of different evidenced-based portfolios that are linked explicitly to the competency profiles for each level.

The process of learning to become an effective teacher has long been acknowledged to be a complex process that requires developing and orchestrating different types of knowledge, skills and professional dispositions. These include the following: 14
- knowledge of the curriculum, subject matter and teaching resources along with an understanding of how students develop and learn (Leinhardt and Greeno 1986; Carter 1990).

- pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman 1987b; Turner-Bissett 2001; Hashweh 2005; Mishra and Koehler 2006).

- generic and specialized pedagogical skills for organizing learning, teaching and assessment (Freiberg and Driscoll 2000); and

- professional dispositions including “values, commitments and professional ethics” (NCATE 2001:19).

The development of the PTPDI was designed to reflect a recognition of the holistic nature of the above types of knowledge, skills and dispositions. Each level of the PTPDI comprises the same three core competences and 16 sub-competences underpinned by 8 core values that the Palestinian working group deemed important (Table 2). Each level of sub-competency is illustrated by more detailed indicators that elaborate the types of performance that may be expected at that level. These are informed by the combinations of knowledge, understanding and skills required to facilitate effective learning as indicated above, and reflect the daily tasks of class teachers in the West Bank and Gaza. The competences are articulated to emphasize the importance of placing the central focus of planning, teaching and assessing on facilitating children’s learning.

15
Table 2. Overview of the PTPDI competences, sub-competences, values, beliefs and attitudes

**Palestinian Teacher Professional Development Index of Competences**

<!-- Start of picture text --> Planning for learning and Teaching to facilitate learning Assessing and reporting<br>teaching learning outcomes and<br>1. Learning environment<br>progress<br>1. Subject content 2. Teaching strategies and<br>2. Palestinian curriculum resources 1. Assessment for learning<br>3. Factors that promote 3. Technology enhanced strategies<br>learning learning and teaching 2. Assessment to inform<br>4. Factors that hinder (TELT) planning<br>learning 4. Strategies for positive 3. Reporting students’<br>5. Link between planning, behaviour progress<br>teaching and evaluation 5. Approaches to inclusive<br>practice<br>6. Connections across the<br>curriculum<br>7. Effective communication<br>8. Continuing professional<br><!-- End of picture text -->

# **Core professional values, beliefs and attitudes to underpin the professional teaching competences**

1. Love and respect children and care for their well-being.

2. Value inclusive practice and the learning of all students.

3. Regard students as integral partners in the educational process.

4. Believe that every pupil can achieve high but realistic expectations and that teachers play a significant role in facilitating students to realise their individual potential.

5. Hold positive, flexible attitudes towards change and a commitment to continued professional development.

6. Adopt a reflective and critical approach to teaching through examining, questioning and discussing one’s own practice.

7. Hold positive attitudes towards teamwork and collaboration.

8. Adopt high standards of ethical practice in all dealings with students and parties concerned with children’s education.

Given the complexity involved in orchestrating knowledge and skill development and the development of professional values, beliefs and attitudes, it is to be expected that teachers will develop their competences at different rates and to different extents and levels throughout their careers. The complexity and progressive nature of competency development as a career long endeavor is reflected in the way in which each sub-competency is further elaborated through a series of indicators. The indicators present the range of expectations, core activities and increasing complexity of the sub-competences as teachers progress through the career levels. This is reflected in increased demands that range from basic awareness and use for beginning student teachers, to the demonstration of essential knowledge, understanding and skills for new teachers, through to the ability to apply detailed knowledge of pedagogical practice and take on leadership roles to guide the development of other teachers expected of the most exceptional teachers (see Table 3).

16
Table 3: Sub-competency and indicators from Level 1 to Level 5

|Levels of<br>competency<br>progression|Level 1:<br>Readiness to<br>Teach<br>(Foundation)<br>Student<br>Teacher<br>Practicum 2-<br>3|Level 2a:<br>Readiness to<br>Teach (Core)<br>Student<br>Teacher<br>Practicum 4-<br>5|Level 2b:<br>Essential<br>New teacher|Level 3:<br>Capable<br>Teacher|Level 4:<br>Advanced<br>First Teacher|Level 5:<br>Exceptional<br>Expert<br>teacher|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Sub-<br>competences|Indicators|Indicators|Indicators|Indicators|Indicators|Indicators|
|Use<br>appropriate<br>strategies to<br>provide<br>opportunities<br>for pupils to<br>make<br>meaningful<br>connections<br>among<br>learning<br>across the<br>curriculum<br>and to their<br>daily lives.|Plan, teach<br>and evaluate<br>learning<br>activities,<br>partial and<br>full lessons,<br>which<br>integrate<br>basic<br>concepts and<br>content from<br>different<br>curriculum<br>areas that are<br>relevant to<br>the direct<br>context of<br>pupils’ lives.|Plan, teach<br>and evaluate<br>learning<br>activities,<br>lessons and<br>units of<br>work, which<br>integrate<br>concepts and<br>content from<br>different<br>curriculum<br>areas, and<br>make links<br>to the direct<br>context of<br>pupils’ lives.|Plan, teach<br>and evaluate<br>learning<br>activities,<br>lessons and<br>units of<br>work, which<br>integrate<br>concepts and<br>content from<br>different<br>curriculum<br>areas, and<br>make links<br>to the direct<br>context of<br>pupils’ lives.|Design,<br>develop,<br>teach and<br>evaluate<br>lessons<br>and/or units<br>of work,<br>which<br>integrate<br>coherently<br>and<br>meaningfully<br>aspects of<br>content from<br>different<br>curriculum<br>subjects, and<br>make<br>effective<br>links to the<br>direct<br>context of<br>pupils’ lives.|Analyse the<br>curriculum<br>in order to<br>design,<br>develop and<br>teach<br>purposeful<br>sequences of<br>lessons/units<br>of work,<br>which<br>integrate<br>coherently<br>and<br>meaningfully<br>aspects of<br>content from<br>different<br>curriculum<br>subjects, and<br>make strong<br>links to the<br>direct<br>context of<br>pupils’ lives.|Collaborate<br>with and<br>assist other<br>teachers to<br>analyse and<br>evaluate the<br>curriculum<br>and identify<br>opportunities<br>whereby the<br>curriculum<br>may be<br>tailored to<br>enable pupils<br>to make<br>meaningful<br>connections<br>among<br>related areas<br>of learning<br>across the<br>curriculum.|

Although designed first and foremost as a competency framework and roadmap to guide all stages of teacher professional development, the PTPDI also serves as a multipurpose instrument for use in several related aspects of teacher development and career advancement. It provides a framework and points of reference for use in: (a) the design and development of PRESET, Induction and INSET programs; (b) the evaluation of both trainee and practicing teachers and the grading of their _Portfolios_ (these evidenced-based portfolios linked to the competency statements are used to evaluate teachers’ competency development at each level); (c) identification and selection of Mentor Teachers and other teachers of excellence; (d) identification of teachers who are capable of taking on leadership roles within schools and (e) promotion on the teaching ladder. (f) the PTPDI also facilitates a results-based approach to the management of teachers, teaching and teacher education. The PTPDI has been widely and 17
successfully used for functions (a) and (b). It has great potential for functions (c), (d) (e) and (f) and Ministry Supervisors in their work with practicing teachers.

The following factors elucidate the impact of the PTPDI: (1) it facilitated a change of culture and management style in relation to teacher education and teaching; (2) it put an onus on managers to develop new capacities to implement competence-based evaluations and resultsbased approaches; (3) by providing a graduated scale of teaching competences, the PTPDI helped to establish the _connective tissue_ between the various stages of teacher professional development - PRESET, Induction and INSET (Feiman-Nemser 2001); (4) the advent of the PTPDI highlighted the need for all involved in the continuum of teacher education to join forces in developing coherent policies and practices to facilitate collaboration and ensure continuity in the career-long development of teachers (see Figure 1).

The PTPDI has been lauded by Education Deans and Faculties, and by Ministry personnel, as a powerful instrument for upgrading the quality of teachers and ensuring the relevance of teacher education programs to actual practice.

# **5. Impact of TEIP: Outputs and Outcomes**

The overall impact of TEIP can be gauged from the outputs and outcomes of the PRESET and INSET components. It is also borne out in quantitative and qualitative evidence from multiple sources<sup>10</sup> and in an independent evaluation. Consultation with and between all stakeholders, which was a constant feature of TEIP, was also a valuable source of impact evidence. In the absence of data on the achievement levels of students in participating schools,<sup>11</sup> the PTPDI was a critical tool in the collection and verification of concrete evidence of impact.

Positive responses gleaned from qualitative data reported for both PRESET and INSET participants were supported by the outcomes of quantitative studies carried out by AED on behalf of the MoEHE. According to a draft of AED’s final report (not released<sup>12</sup> but cited in the ICR, 2019: 13-14), pre-service Practicum 5 trainee teachers scored higher than their Practicum 2 counterparts in 12 of 14 competences observed. In six of these, the differences were reported to have been statistically significant.

> 10 These sources include: classroom observation of TEIP participants; annual reports from the participating universities, CCCU and the MoEHE Project Coordination Unit; biannual World Bank Aide Memoirs; Impact Reports from MoEHE’s Assessment and Evaluation Department (AED); self-reports from TEIP participants; an independent evaluation of TEIP (Assaf July 2019); an _Implementation Completion and Results Report_ (ICR) commissioned by the World Bank (2019).

> 11 The MoEHE and World Bank teams had to forego the measurement of learning outcomes due to: (a) lack of an established system in the West Bank and Gaza to track such; (b) the organizational demands and funding requirements to put a standardized learning assessment system in place for Grades 1-4. The MoEHE discontinued participation in PIRLS and TIMMS during the pilot phase of TEIP.

> 12 The external evaluator of TEIP expressed concern about AED’s overreliance on satisfaction ratings of participants in the determination of project impact (Assad 2019). Some TEIP consultants were also concerned about the limitations of the Fitzpatrick Model of evaluation and the Stallings method of classroom observations used in some of AED’s evaluations of the project.

18
In the case of the INSET component, graduating UQTs outscored a control group in 11 of 14 competences observed. In nine of these the differences were reported to have been statistically significant.

Overall, the evidence confirms that a paradigm shift occurred in thinking on, and practice in, teacher education, teaching and learning in the West Bank and Gaza during the lifetime of TEIP.

# **5.1. Qualitative data collection and analysis**

In order to develop realistic and in-depth insights into the impact that TEIP had on the range of participants affected by the project, it was necessary to find out the perceptions and opinions of key stakeholders about the successes, challenges and limitations of the project during its lifecycle. Due to the complex nature of TEIP and the involvement of multiple partners and stakeholders,<sup>13</sup> a conscious decision was taken to use qualitative data collection methods in order to gain ‘rich’ data sets for analysis (Miles and Huberman 1994). As Maykut and Morehouse (2002: 18) explain, "words are the way that most people come to understand their situations; we create our world with words; we explain ourselves with words; we defend and hide ourselves with words". Consequently, it was decided that in-depth semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders would be conducted each year of the project. This would enable participants to voice how they perceived their roles, enacted their successes, dealt with their challenges and gauged the impact on them professionally.

Data on the development and progress of both the PRESET and INSET components were collected systematically each year of the project. For the PRESET component this involved visits to the participating universities and cooperating schools, semi-structured interviews with student teachers, relevant university staff, district supervisors, mentor teachers and school principals. Interviews lasted between 45 and 60 minutes each. Lesson observations of student teachers with follow-up interviews were also conducted. For the INSET component, similar interviews were held with relevant university trainers, UQTs, school principals, and district supervisors. Lesson observations were also conducted with UQTs. Key ministry personnel from DSQ, NIET and the project’s local consultants were also interviewed. Towards the end of Phase 1 (2015) and Phase 2 (2019) of the project large focus group meetings were held with groups of student teachers and UQTs in each district. The same interview protocols and lesson observation schedules were used consistently throughout. This enabled direct longitudinal comparison of progress. The outcomes of the data collection and analysis were reported annually by CCCU with final versions issued at the end of Phase 1 and 2 of the project (CCCU 2014, 2019).

The qualitative data from the stakeholder interviews were analyzed using a constant comparative approach (Maykut and Morehouse 2002). This enabled key points of similarity and difference within and among different data sets from each setting and type of respondent to be merged according to category and sub-category and the emergent themes within them to be coded. These integrated findings are related to key aspects of the project and the specific deliverables of both its PRESET and INSET components. They indicated generalizable outcomes which were then used to inform the construction of specific recommendations

> 13 The stakeholders from whom data were collected included MoEHE officials, District Supervisors, academic staff at universities, NIET trainers, School Principals, teachers and student teachers.

19
(CCCU, 2019). By examining converging responses of participants, dominant patterns in the data could be identified and effects of individual factors minimized.

An “interpretive-descriptive” approach (Thorne 2008) to interpreting the data was adopted. This approach involves accurately describing what has been understood and reconstructing data into a ‘recognizable reality’ for the participants of the research. It requires selection and interpretation of data by weaving respondents’ words, field note quotations, and evaluator’s interpretations into a “rich and believable descriptive narrative”. This approach is particularly suitable for this comprehensive review of TEIP since it allows all significant stakeholders a voice that is blended into a series of themes and related issues that are shared by a number of people. It also adheres to the advice of Maykut and Morehouse (1994: 18) who suggest that "the task of the researcher is to find patterns within words and to present those patterns for others to inspect while at the same time staying as close to the construction of the world as the participants originally experienced it”.

The interview data were supplemented by reference to a wide range of documentary reports, research studies and articles. This entailed the scrutiny of student teacher and teacher portfolios at different points during the project, with final portfolio samples compared to earlier samples. In addition, observations of teachers and student teachers at work in their classrooms and of training sessions in operation were conducted by CCCU team members at key points during the project. Finally, the contents of field notes that had been collected from the beginning of CCCU involvement in the project also contributed to the data sets that were analyzed.

Critical outputs and outcomes from the PRESET and INSET Components of TEIP are presented in summary form hereunder.<sup>14</sup>

# **5.2 TEIP Outputs: PRESET and INSET**

Significant outputs include:

- The _PTPDI_ which identified the competences to be mastered at each stage of a teacher’s professional development and which acted as an instrument to guide all TEIP activities.

- Extension of the PRESET _Teaching Practicum_ from 4 to 14 weeks of mentored teaching and the integration of entire programs around the fulcrum of the _Teaching Practicum_ (both subsequently mandated by AQAC for all PRESET programs).

- Development of a series of five university-based courses/seminars (80 hours) to support the different stages of the _Practicum._

- Practicum and Mentor Training Handbooks.

- Integration of CK and PCK in the development of ten PRESET and nine INSET modules.

- A system of portfolio development and evidence-based evaluation linked to the PTPDI competences for both PRESET and INSET, along with Handbooks for same.

- Final output from TEIP’s PRESET programs (still in progress) expected to be 2,352 (PCU Reports 2018, 2019).

- Total throughput of UQTs in the INSET component was 3,987.

> 14 For further details on project impact, see TEIP-related documents on the MoEHE website: www.palpcu.ps.

20
- Reduction in the proportion of under-qualified teachers in Grade 1-4 classrooms from an estimated 46% in 2011 to 8.4% in 2018 (PCU Reports 2015, 2018; ICR 2019).<sup>15</sup>

- 167 _INSET Trainers_ trained.

- The _Implementation Completion and Results Report_ (ICR 2019) estimates that 91,400 primary school students benefitted from instruction by TEIP-trained teachers.

All outputs were developed by Palestinian personnel with technical assistance from CCCU. _Study Visits_ by critical personnel to CCCU and UK schools impacted very positively on this developmental work. The availability of several outputs on an MoEHE website <u>(www.palpcu.ps)</u> is a significant accomplishment.

# **5.3  TEIP Outcomes: Impact on PRESET**

The data collection approaches and methods of analysis described above enabled multiple perspectives on relevant issues to be considered and triangulated to identify dominant themes, patterns and issues. Evidence from the multiple sources cited confirms the overarching themes and outcomes detailed hereunder.

# **5.3.1 Degree programs and practicum**

Student teachers expressed generally high levels of satisfaction with the design of the new degree programs which they perceived as relevant to their needs as prospective teachers. They welcomed the opportunities provided to work in several schools from early in their programs compared to the four-week practicum placements in the final year of previous PRESET programs. By providing multiple opportunities to discuss and reflect on their teaching experiences in university-based practicum courses, the new programs helped student teachers to effectively connect theory and actual practice. The overall effect was to increase their selfconfidence in relation to teaching.

Towards the end of the TEIP in 2019 there was a noticeable improvement in the quality of observed lessons compared to the end of the pilot phase in 2015. Most lessons involved consistent use of creative and interactive child-centered approaches. It was clear that more students were employing a wider range of pedagogical strategies and types of learning activities, connecting learning across subjects, and designing lessons that addressed the needs of diverse learners. In addition, most students in the later practicum periods of phase two of TEIP demonstrated increased confidence, motivation and enthusiasm in their teaching.

# **5.3.2 PTPDI and student competency development**

Student teachers were generally very positive about the PTPDI and in focus group interviews identified a range of ways in which it had impacted on them. The PTPDI helped them: to think about what targets to set for each practicum placement and to motivate them towards the achievement of those targets; to identify specific competences they themselves had successfully mastered and those which needed further development; to set overall goals for their professional development and to confidently gauge progress towards the achievement of

> 15 Sufficient teachers were trained in TEIP’s PRESET and INSET programs to eliminate all UQTs in grade 1-4 classrooms, but lack of tight control of teacher appointments and transfers resulted in a small percentage of UQTs still operating in primary education at the end of the project.

21
those goals; to understand and appreciate the competency levels required for excellence in teaching.

Academic staff were also generally very positive about the PTPDI and appreciated the increased coherence in the programs that resulted from having everything aligned to the PTPDI. Concentration on 3 competences and 16 sub-competences provided them with a frame of reference for evaluation. One commented: “We all have a common understanding of what we are evaluating”. Another said: “We evaluate student teachers according to the PTPDI matrix and this is the same for the mentor teachers and District Supervisors.” One student teacher commented: “It is good for us to evaluate ourselves and for the mentors to evaluate us. It is a unified vision for both.” It was also recognized that the PTPDI provides a common language for all stakeholders and that student teachers use this common language to become critical friends to each other in their professional development.

# **5.3.3 Portfolio**

The introduction of an evidence-based practicum portfolio took almost five years to fully embed. Academic staff acknowledged that earlier attempts were limited to students collecting teaching-related materials, but “now there is a culture of evidenced-based portfolio”. The lengthy process of trialing different approaches to portfolio assessment enabled staff and students to become familiar with more authentic measures of assessment and to gradually develop confidence and ownership. In one university the Practicum Coordinator was particularly proactive and initiated several innovations. He designed new templates for student teachers to identify children’s misconceptions and identified strategies to address them. He also provided more detailed criteria for portfolio tasks and, ultimately, transformed the portfolio into an online-portfolio facilitating immediate and direct contact with student teachers.

Although some students acknowledged that developing the portfolio was hard work and some felt that there were too many tasks, the majority recognized its value to their professional development. Most student teachers were able to talk confidently and with insight about the competences they were developing during practicum periods. One student commented: “The thing I appreciate the most is the development of my teaching from the first practicum to now. I can see it in everything from the portfolio to the mentor feedback”. Many other students mentioned that the portfolio helped them to think about the competences they needed to develop and how to develop them. One commented: “It is wonderful because it shows you the self-improvement that you make.” Students mentioned many benefits to doing the portfolio tasks, including: what they learn from authentic and realistic tasks; how the tasks help them to organize their ideas better, plan more effectively, recognize problems in the classroom and think of solutions, understand the areas they need to work on, develop research skills, develop their own success stories and be more organized in their personal life. One student explained how her practice had changed while developing a portfolio task: “At first I did not think about planning for positive behaviour but now I spend five minutes at the beginning of every lesson to prepare the children for the lesson.” 22
Students were also able to compare and identify differences in portfolios during different practicum periods. One explained: “In Practicum 2 and 3 the Portfolio was easy and simple. Now I have a deep analytical portfolio”. Another added: “In the beginning I focussed on main ideas, now I focus on details.” Overall the responses of large numbers of students confirmed their emerging professional identities as novice teachers.

# **5.4 TEIP Outcomes: Impact on INSET**

# **5.4.1 INSET Training program**

The INSET training programs were delivered by trainers from five universities across all regions of the West Bank and Gaza. Participating UQTs from across all settings consistently expressed very high levels of satisfaction with the quality and relevance of the training received. Their responses indicate different and changing perceptions of value as the programs proceeded. Initially some teachers had a negative view of the INSET program assuming that it would be like other training courses they had attended. However, they quickly realized that they were learning a lot and their opinions changed positively. Others found the training program useful from the beginning. Yet others reported that, during training, they did not realize how useful it was but discovered its value later when they returned to their schools and started to implement the pedagogical strategies and use the teaching materials that had been developed during the program. A particularly interesting indicator of impact is that, as a result of the training, UQTs in most districts expressed the desire to do further training along the same lines. Several expressed the desire to proceed to a master’s degree and some did so. These positive indicators of commitment are even more striking when considered against a backdrop of having to attend the INSET sessions every weekend for two semesters, at a time when teacher salaries were only partially paid, and without any reduction in their teaching loads. Furthermore, the majority participants were mothers of young families. In addition, as the relevance of the INSET program became known and its benefits evident in the teaching of UQTs, numerous requests were received from fully qualified teachers to be allowed to participate.

Trainers from across the districts were equally positive about the value of the INSET program. Their responses focused on the importance of the training for UQTs believing that, although they had many years of teaching experience and some had university degrees, they benefited significantly from updating their pedagogical knowledge. Furthermore, since the UQTs were retraining as _Class Teachers_ and would subsequently have to teach unfamiliar subjects, the program helped equip those in both the Arts and Math/Science streams to do so. Other trainer responses focused on how the PRESET program helped UQTs to connect theory and practice, to identify and develop teaching competences, and to reflect on and evaluate their progress utilizing their evidence-based portfolios. For many trainers, this approach constituted the uniqueness of the INSET program. As one trainer put it: “It is unlike any other training. It has many new things to add. It did give motivation to the teachers.” 23
# **5.4.2 Impact on UQTs professional development**

The UQTs who undertook the INSET training program had an average of almost 15 years of teaching experience. This, along with the intensive nature of the training, generated reflections on the program’s impact that were qualitatively deeper and more perceptive than those of the student teachers participating in the PRESET program. The main theme that emerged was one of transformative impact in five key areas; (1) teacher professional identity, (2) perceptions of teaching and learning (3) student-focused pedagogical practices (4) catering for the differentiated learning needs of students and (5) awareness of the impact of teaching on students.

_Professional Identity_ . Participating UQTs began to see themselves as guides for children’s learning rather than ‘chalk and talk’ presenters of information. Their professional confidence and teaching abilities increased to a level that had several UQTs demonstrating new teaching practices to their fully qualified colleagues. Perhaps the most revealing comments echoed by many UQTs revealed the extent to which the training program had reawakened their sense of commitment and motivation. Several echoed the comment of one UQT with twenty years of teaching experience who said: “I feel like a new teacher, starting again from the beginning.” _Reflective Practice_ . UQTs widely reported that their experiences during the training program had made them more reflective about teaching and learning. Several admitted that they had never previously reflected upon what they did in the classroom or on the impact of their teaching on students’ learning. For some UQTs, the opportunity to engage in guided reflection during portfolio tasks and Learning Circle discussions transformed how they perceived themselves as teachers and their practice in the classroom. Trainers also affirmed this and emphasized that teachers not only became more reflective but were more able to support their claims with evidence from practice.

_Student-focused teaching._ One of the key areas of impact, evident to a greater degree at the termination of TEIP than at the end of the pilot stage, was a realization that children should be at the center of the learning process. While previously the core concern of UQTs was completing the textbook, now their focus had shifted onto children’s learning, as one teacher put it, on how to “make learning more memorable and enjoyable.” Another added: “I stopped focusing on the marks and started to focus on how to get the students involved in the learning process.” Teachers also talked about how they had become more sensitive and aware of students’ problems and needs. The module on _Special Education Needs and Inclusion_ was cited by many as being particularly useful in increasing their awareness and confidence in recognizing and dealing with diverse student needs. They felt “more qualified” and “noticed a difference in these students’ interaction in the lessons.” This module clearly filled a gap as they readily admitted the lack of such an input in any previous in-service course taken.

_Impact on pedagogical practice_ . Teachers across all settings talked about a wide variety of ways in which their practices had changed as a result of the INSET training program. A key element was using the textbook more flexibly and being more creative and responsive in their teaching. The changes included: using more group and independent work; differentiating 24
learning by setting groups different tasks; focusing more on developing creativity; giving opportunities for students to explore concepts; setting students problems to work out rather than giving answers; identifying and addressing students’ misconceptions; giving students more time to finish their work; being more aware of the individual differences and needs of their students; adopting cross-curricular learning and teaching approaches; and using more play-based activities. Most of these indicators were observed in practice during project evaluation. Overall, there was a much wider range of indicators of change at the end of phase two of TEIP in 2019 than reported at the end of the pilot phase in 2015.

_Awareness of impact on students_ . UQTs were enthusiastic in their descriptions of the ways in which changes in their teaching practices had impacted on their students. Many identified significant differences. Students, they said, became more confident, cooperative, interested, engaged and creative, more willing to ask questions and express ideas. Class observations throughout the project confirmed these findings in the majority of lessons observed. The number of teachers reporting such changes was higher than at the end of phase two of TEIP in 2019 that at the terminations of the pilot phase in 2015.

# **5.4.3 PTPDI and teachers’ competency development**

Some teachers reported that, at the beginning of the training, they found the PTPDI difficult to understand or thought it was not useful but that this view changed later. By the end of the project a large majority of UQTs were overwhelmingly positive about the PTPDI and articulated a wide range of ways in which it helped them to further develop their understanding of teaching and learning and of themselves as teachers. Several stated that they had never previously thought about what is involved in teaching and learning or simply approached the task in random fashion. UQTs commented as follows on how they went about incorporating the PTPDI in their planning and practice: one used it “as a checklist to see how much I covered in developing my competences”; for another it helped her “understand what I was doing inside my classroom and what to focus on to improve”; for another it helped her “to predict the effect of my teaching on students’ learning.” UQTs also talked about how it helped them to focus on the learning and teaching competences, instructional strategies and student misconceptions. One teacher summarized its impact succinctly on all UQTs. The PTPDI, she said, “became the cornerstone of our teaching work; for ideas, for objectives.” UQTs talked about how the PTPDI helped them to self-evaluate. For many of them this meant that they started to think about their competences as teachers for the first time and had begun to evaluate themselves according to the competency levels. They had increasingly become conscious of which level they were operating at and were able to justify their self-evaluation verdict. One said: “I am at beginning of the top level because now I am beginning to have an effect on other teachers.” Other UQTs used the PTPDI to set professional targets for themselves. One said: “I want to be at the top level. I want to improve.” Another said: “I always refer to it [PTPDI] to see what progress I made and what I need to do to progress.” Trainers were also clear about the positive impact of the PTPDI in guiding teachers’ competency development. One commented that it is “like a paper mentor for teachers” while 25
another pointed out that it provides a “roadmap for teacher’s training and capacity building.” Trainers also acknowledged the difficulties faced initially in understanding the PTPDI, “but after practicing and implementing it, they started to find themselves in the PTPDI and now they go to their level.”

# **5.4.4 Portfolio**

To develop an evidenced-based portfolio was a completely new experience for both teachers and trainers. At the beginning of the process both groups encountered challenges. However, during the course of the training most teachers and trainers were able to see its value. While the vast majority of teachers talked about the developmental value of the portfolio as a tool for _learning_ , most trainers talked about it more in terms of its value as a tool for _evaluation_ .

UQTs focused specifically on the use of the Portfolio as an organizational tool to support their learning and as an appropriate means of evaluating both their learning and teaching. For some teachers using it as a tool to support their own learning meant using it simply as a record, but for others it clearly provided a stimulus for connecting their thinking about competences to their classroom practice. Focus group discussions revealed many perceived benefits of, and interesting practices in, portfolio development. The following quotations bear these out: “It was most useful when I prepared sequences of lessons and thought about the competences I will need in a progressive way”; “I could see my strengths and weaknesses in my teaching and think about how to solve them”; “It becomes a method in thinking about teaching”; “I am always thinking about how to justify the lesson for my students”; and “It made me think how can I own the skills”.

Teachers also liked the organizational potential the portfolio offered, where they saw it as a way to document or showcase their work, or to keep track of what they had learned. Some talked about it as a “summary of a learning journey through all the modules.” In terms of evaluation, UQTs preferred the portfolio to more traditional evaluation practices. As one put it: “Exams are just about grades and portfolio is about learning.” The engagement and perception of relevance and value of the portfolio to teachers was further indicated by those teachers who reported that they were still continuing voluntarily to develop the portfolio several months after completing the training.

The overall level of impact of the INSET program was more significant and more evident at the end of phase 2 of TEIP in 2019 than at the end of the pilot phase in 2015 (CCCU 2019).

# **5.5. TEIP outcomes: Impact on managerial culture**

The development and extensive use of the PTPDI in every aspect of TEIP (Figure 1) both facilitated and required a results-focused approach to the management of teachers, teaching and teacher education based on PTPDI competences that could be observed and evaluated and also improved through self-reflection, peer collaboration and professional feedback. The PTPDI provided:

- a management instrument for evaluating PRESET and INSET programs.

26
- a reliable, teaching-focused, means of establishing the levels of expertise of teachers and identifying their professional development needs.

- clear and verifiable criteria on which to build a career structure for the teaching profession.

Two further sources provide independent evidence of impact:

1. The award of unconditional accreditation to five of the six TEIP PRESET programs by panels of national/international personnel.

2. The granting of the prestigious _Times Higher Education Award for International Impact, 2018’_ in the United Kingdom in recognition of the ground-breaking work undertaken in TEIP and the potential to replicate its strategic approaches in other countries. As stated earlier, the TEIP model has already impacted significantly on the development of strategic frameworks for the reform of teacher education in other World Bank-supported projects (see Postscript for details).

# **6. Teacher Education Reform in the West Bank and Gaza: Unfinished Business**

Every profession is a ‘work in progress’. While TEIP has terminated, significant professional and policy-related challenges remain. These include:

1. The full utilization and application of the **PTPDI** in all matters related to teacher education and teaching.

2. The further development of a **results-focused approach to educational management** based on PTPDI competences.

3. Continued and extended **integration of PRESET programs** around the fulcrum of teaching and learning and as an antidote to the re-emergence of the theory-practice dichotomies that characterized earlier approaches to teacher education.

4. **Extension of the Teaching Practicum** from the current 14% of total program time towards the international norm of 25% when adequate program consolidation and capacity building work warrants such an extension.

5. Further development, formal recognition, better facilitation, and adequate remuneration of **Mentors –** the ‘hidden professionals’ in teacher education (Livingston 2014).<sup>16</sup> 6. **Establishing and maintaining a continuum of professional development** from PRESET to Induction to INSET. In the West Bank and Gaza these have tended to operate largely in isolation from each other. To ensure progress in this regard the MoEHE, DSQ, NIET and the universities need to develop a comprehensive strategic framework and to identify realistic, incremental, time-lined, strategies that will ensure the sharing of approaches, expertise and personnel across the continuum of teacher professional development. The PTPDI will greatly facilitate this process.

7. **Updating the competences of “qualified teachers.”** The INSET modules developed for UQTs in TEIP provide a valuable resource that should be utilized to update and

> 16 As _Teacher Trainers_ who operate where theory meets practice and college courses meet classroom realities, Mentors must have a comprehensive understanding of overall program content and rationale and of their role in teacher professional development. _Gugan Teachers_ in China effectively fulfill a mentoring role for both trainee and practicing teachers (see Sargent 2015).

27
further enhance the competences of the large number of fully qualified serving teachers who graduated from older PRESET programs.<sup>17</sup> 8. **Maintaining a professional mindset** , institutionalizing the reforms implemented in TEIP and incorporating them in a national, policy-supported, strategy for teacher education.

9. **Pedagogical capacity building for teacher educators** . In all professional areas trainers constitute the major conduits through which up-to-date knowledge and expertise are ‘fed into’ a system. Pedagogical capacity building was central to the success of TEIP. Sustaining and embedding TEIP reforms within the system will require good planning, clear-cut policy decisions and adequate funding for ongoing capacity building for all involved in the professional development of teachers (Schwille & Dembélé (2007).

10. **AQAC,** as the core, independent, agency responsible for quality assurance in professional education, can now play a major role in ensuring that TEIP reforms are sustained and embedded within the system. To fulfil this role AQAC needs further capacity building and ongoing support (Moran 2017, 2018).

11. **Implementing the implications of PRESET program accreditation** . Now that TEIP’s PRESET programs have been accredited, a critical challenge for the Government and the MoEHE is how to deal with the thousands of graduates of unaccredited PRESET programs who apply annually for the available teaching positions while, at the same time, exercising governmental _duty of care_ for professional services to the public (see options in Appendix 1 for handling this issue which is problematic for most developing countries).

12. **Matching teacher supply to demand.** The TES (2008: 10) proposed limiting the number of entrants to teacher education to match the national demand for teachers. Currently, there is a massive surplus of trainee and unemployed teachers.<sup>18</sup> Since the education/training of professionals (unlike that of humanities students) requires much more small-group work and one-to-one mentoring/coaching, teaching will ultimately suffer if the level of entry to PRESET programs is not controlled (Schleicher 2018).

Addressing this problem is politically difficult since teacher education is one of the easiest, and sometimes the only, access route to tertiary education for many students, especially in low-income countries. Furthermore, intake to teacher education programs generates significant levels of income for universities. In this regard, two options may merit consideration: (a) the determination by accreditation panels of the maximum number of student teachers that can be adequately catered for in individual PRESET programs; (b) the provision of _non-teaching_ education degrees (e.g. a _BA in Education Studies)_ with the option, for those interested, of subsequently pursuing a Diploma in Teaching.

13. Looking to the future, it is critically important to view the planned and approved intervention in **_Early Childhood Education and Development_** as an integral and integrated part of the overall teaching/learning/teacher education program already developed in TEIP and not as separate from it. ECE is the foundation on which later

> 17 This was recommended by both CCCU and World Bank consultants.

> 18 There are approximately 40,000 in PRESET programs, with about 10,000 graduating each year. Over 80,000 apply for the fewer than 2,000 annual teaching vacancies.

28
education is constructed and should always be thought of and treated as part of an education continuum. The West Bank and Gaza should not follow the ill-advised practice of some other countries where there is a lack of continuity in policy, personnel and programs between ECE and the later stages of education and teacher education and where less qualified and more poorly paid teachers are deployed.

# **7. Lessons Learned from the Development and Implementation of TEIP**

The following valuable lessons have emerged from the collective experiences of the stakeholders involved in the development and implementation of TEIP – lessons that may prove helpful to other countries contemplating similar reforms within their own jurisdictions:

1. The critical importance of having a professional development index of verifiable teaching competences to inform development, facilitate evaluation, and guide the management of all aspects of teacher education reform along the continuum of PRESET, Induction and INSET. The PTPDI provided this for TEIP.

2. The ownership of TEIP by the MoEHE, coupled with sustained leadership of the reform program by the Deputy Minister, as line manager, assisted by DSQ and NIET were critical factors in TEIP’s success.<sup>19</sup> 3. The importance of being _au fait_ with international good-practice trends in teaching/learning and teacher education. While education personnel in the West Bank and Gaza had limited access to such, it is clear that the authors of the _Teacher Education Strategy_ (2008) were _au fait with_ modern trends. Technical assistance from consultants enhanced the level of knowledge in this regard.

The importance of, and need for, adequate consultation, cooperation and triangulation among stakeholders in planning and implementing TEIP. The project was characterized throughout by a _collaborative participatory approach_ based on respect for, good relationships between, and the sharing of expertise by the MoEHE, the participating universities, the schools, CCCU and the World Bank team. The resultant partnership was a critical factor in the success of TEIP.<sup>20</sup> 4. A research-based focus on teachers/teaching/teacher education as the major determinants of school effectiveness led to a simple and clear project design for TEIP that proved very effective. The PTPDI provided a mechanism whereby every aspect of the project could be designed, developed, implemented and evaluated in a process that was coherent, systemic, transparent and verifiable.

> 19 Following their research on teacher education in five developing countries, Lewin and Stuart (2003) concluded: “The constructive and effective development of teacher education requires access to Ministerial authority [and] clear lines of administrative control and accountability” (p. 183).

> 20 While universities internationally tend to be wary of ministerial encroachment on their academic freedom, in the case of TEIP, both the World Bank team and CCCU members acted as effective buffers between the MoEHE and the universities since all CCCU personnel and most of the World Bank team were current or former members of education faculties in their own countries.

29
5. The centrality of pedagogical capacity building for all stakeholders involved in TEIP was a critical and indispensable factor in the reform of teaching and teacher education in the West Bank and Gaza.

6. The fact that the capacity building process did not involve the importation of any readymade ‘products’ from outside was a novel factor in TEIP. The PRESET and INSET programs, Modules, Handbooks, Portfolios, and the PTPDI were all designed and developed by Palestinian personnel informed and facilitated by the technical assistance of CCCU.

It was engagement in this developmental process that constituted pedagogical capacity building for all involved, which generated in-depth understanding of the reforms, issued in ownership of the process and the products, and that augurs well for the continuation of the reforms after the termination of TEIP. In these respects, TEIP was an innovative and unique intervention. The process developed and pursued therein provides a framework for the effective reform of teacher education in other jurisdictions (see Postscript).

7. The need for an efficient and effective _Project Coordination Unit_ to handle the many logistical, financial, contract and recruitment matters related to the project. This was critical to TEIP’s success and the fact that a single Director was in charge of the unit for the entire lifetime of the project was a significant contributory factor.

8. Engaging a single _Consultant Institution_ (CCCU), with hands-on experience in the provision of PRESET, Induction, and INSET, for both components of TEIP had significant advantages. It was able to provide: (1) venues, programs and first-hand practical experiences for overseas _Study Visits_ ; (2), specialist consultants, as required, at different stages of project implementation; (3) and, with the aid of the PTPDI index of competences, was able to ameliorate the traditional dichotomy between PRESET and INSET and establish the beginnings of the _continuum_ in teacher professional development advocated by Feiman-Nemser (2001) and others.

9. The importance of accreditation to ensure: (a) that PRESET programs are in line with international best practice; (b) that the reforms engendered will be sustained within the system; (c) that graduates of accredited programs have professional credibility at home and abroad.

10. Well planned _Study Visits_ for carefully chosen personnel can be critical to success. In the case of TEIP they proved to be ‘ _game changers’_ .

11. The fact that the total funding for TEIP over the eleven-year period was US$ 8 million indicates that significant reforms in teacher education can be achieved at reasonable cost provided there is strong Ministry support and a _collaborative participatory approach_ among all stakeholders involved.

30
# **8. Conclusion**

TEIP was informed by research-based developments internationally. These confirm (a) the centrality of the role of teachers in the determination of school effectiveness; (b) the availability of a professional knowledge base to inform policy making and actual practice; (c) the need to integrate entire programs around the fulcrum of teaching and learning and, with a focus on PCK, undo the dichotomies that bedeviled traditional approaches to teacher education; and (d) the need to establish a continuum from PRESET to Induction to INSET. These trends, however, had to be adapted for the Palestinian context. In this regard, Paulo Friere (1970) had advised that excellence cannot be parachuted from one country or education system into another but must be created from within by those who know the context and understand the culture. Thus, while TEIP was designed and implemented within the parameters of international good practice, all outputs were developed by Palestinian personnel with outside technical assistance. This process constituted the core of capacity building for the critical personnel involved, ensured relevance of the products to the local context, and generated ownership of and commitment to the reforms. In this respect TEIP was different to many other reform projects of this kind.

TEIP was also innovative in the development and utilization of the PTPDI as a multipurpose instrument for the design of PRESET and INSET programs, the development of an array of curriculum modules, the identification and assessment of teacher competences and for the results-based management and evaluation of the project. It has considerable potential for further utilization.

The _collaborative participatory approach_ to development adopted in TEIP, together with the lessons learned through the implementation of the project, may merit consideration as a framework for systemic reform of teacher education in other countries. In fact, that influence is already evident in a number of other World Bank-supported teacher education reform projects (see Postscript). where the TEIP model of reform is being further developed and refined.

In view of the fact that the West Bank and Gaza is a long-term conflict zone operating under significant geo-political and financial constraints, and that both regions are operating under separate jurisdictions, the level of implementation success that was achieved in TEIP is remarkable and could scarcely have been anticipated in 2008 when the planning of the project commenced.

# **POSTSCRIPT**

# **Influence of TEIP**

The promise of the approaches adopted in TEIP to provide a model for transforming teacher education in low- and middle-income countries may be seen in the following World Bankfunded programs.

1. TEIP was referenced as a case study in the PAD of the World Bank-funded _Enhancing Teacher Education Program (ETEP)_ in Vietnam. The PAD stated that “the design of ETEP has been informed by programs such as TEIP that emphasize hands-on school-

31
based training and continuous professional development” (World Bank 2016, p.43).

2. The principles and approaches that proved so successful in TEIP have also been adopted to inform the conceptualization and design of the teacher education component of the _Education Sector Support Program_ in The Gambia. This includes the development of a _Comprehensive Pre-Service and In-service Strategic Framework for Teacher Education_ and a five-year implementation plan. As in TEIP, the central component of the framework is a professional development index of competences titled _The Gambia Teacher Competency Framework (GTCF)_ . All other components of the program are aligned to the GTCF to ensure a coherent and systemic approach to teacher education reform along a continuum of pre-service, induction and in-service professional development. This will be the first fully developed competency framework in West Africa to be used to redesign all aspects of a teacher education system.

3. The conceptualization and design of the teacher development component of the Additional-Financing phase of the _Zambia Education Enhancement Project (ZEEP-AF)_ has also been closely influenced by the principles and approaches adopted in TEIP. This includes the development of a _Teacher Development Index of Competences_ (TDIC) and suites of in-service modules aligned to the competency index. The TDIC will also be the instrument used to evaluate the teaching competences and professional development of teachers as well as providing the basis for a results-based approach to the management of the professional development of teachers from PRESET to Induction and INSET.

It is evident that lessons learned from the ten years of TEIP are now influencing strategies to achieve coherence in the systemic reform of teacher education in other countries and leading to the development of purpose-built competency frameworks around which all other components are aligned.

32