Teaching_Assistant

The emergence of the Teaching Assistant as reflective practitioner: a well-established norm, a new reality or a future aspiration' Janet Collins and Neil Simco Paper presented at the 2004 British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Manchester. Focusing on the new arrangements for teaching assistants in English primary schools, this paper explores the extent to which reflection is an important, valued and worthwhile concept for a new breed of teaching assistants. Using the established Schon concepts of reflection, it considers the extent to which opportunities are available for reflection –in and –on action (Schon 1983, 1987) and goes on to explore the implications of models concerned with levels of reflection for the work of teaching assistants. The paper goes on to suggest that skills and performance are valued implicitly in the new arrangements in England, but there is a danger of the power of reflection not being recognised as a mechanism for the enhancement of those skills and that performance. The paper concludes by citing a number of specific questions for further empirical work. The issues raised in paper this are illustrated by examples provided from evidence collected during a series of semi-structured interviews with a group of eight bilingual teaching assistants. The teaching assistants work in the same large multicultural primary school in the centre of England. The emergence of the teaching assistant as a key member of the education profession has been most marked since about 2000, but the origins of this move can be traced back to the early 19890s. Before we consider the place of reflection in the work of teaching assistants, it is important to first consider the strengthening of this role that has occurred over the last 25 years or so. Thomas (1992) argues that the Warnock Report (1978) is the origin of the gradual enhancement of the role of teaching assistants in schools across this period. The inauguration of a policy which integrated more and more children with special educational needs into mainstream settings, together with moves to enhance the involvement of parents in schools (for example the Education Reform Act , 1988, which gave parents more `say’ in the way in which schools were run) led to more adults working in schools. The majority of teaching assistants start by working in school as volunteers, often because of a desire to support their own children. Gradually the teaching assistants become part of the school community and are encouraged to spend increased amounts of time in the school and to take on greater responsibilities. I started this job when my children were at school, basically I had nothing else to do at home so because I couldn’t speak English at that time so it was ideal for me to go to help out in the classroom where my children were, that’s how I started. Later on I was offered a job just to fill maternity leave for six weeks. (Shehnaz) Nevertheless, some commentators (e.g. Thomas, 1992) distinguish between two such groups, staff working with children with special educational needs and parents. The significance of the inclusion of children with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream classrooms as a factor in raising the number of teaching assistants continued into the 1990s. Lee (2002) singles out the first Code of Practice on the Identification and Assessment of children with Special Educational Needs as being particularly important as, for the first time, pupils who were deemed to have learning difficulties not sufficient for the issuing of a statement were entitled to formal recognition and the provision of support. An increase of teaching assistants is also related to a growing awareness of the needs of children who have English as an additional language (EAL). Although immigration is nothing new, UK society has become much more linguistically and culturally diverse in the last 50 years, largely owing to economic immigration, but also because of the arrival of significant numbers seeking asylum and to the increasing globalization of the economy. To a greater extent than in the past, incomers have felt able to retain many aspects of their cultural heritage, including their language. This has meant that the linguistic and cultural diversity of the UK is probably greater than ever before. In the greater London area, for example, the number of home languages reportedly exceeds 350 (Baker, and Eversley, 2000). A significant number of students attending schools in England and Wales are bilingual. Provisional Pupil Level Annual School Census (PLASC) figures for England in 2004 suggest that approximately 11% of primary pupils and 9.1 % of secondary pupils have English as an additional language (DfES, 2004). The law has developed to reflect cultural, ethnic and religious diversity. The Race Relations Amendment Act 2000, for example, highlights the need for institutions to re-evaluate and put in place policies to eliminate discrimination. Bilingual teaching assistants often have access to the children’s preferred language and insights into the culture of the local community. This places them in a powerful position with regard to communication and mediation for both children and their parents. They are happy that we know their language and then sometimes they will not go to their own teachers they come to us for help because they know they can speak to us in our own language and they can explain themselves better than they can to the teachers. (Shehnaz) Lee (2002) and Sage and Wilkie (2003) both cite a further factor in the proliferation of the number of teaching assistants in England in recent years. This is concerned with the recruitment and retention of teachers. Concern about recruitment and retention has been widespread in the first few years of the new century and has led to a plethora of initiatives from the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) and the Teacher Training Agency (TTA). For example, new arrangements for early professional development linked to induction and the first five years of teaching were developed by the DfES and the TTA in 2002. Within initial training the broadening of routes into teaching to include flexible and employment-based routes represented significant attempts to enhance teacher recruitment. Whilst there is some evidence of success in enhancing recruitment and retention (TTA 2003), concern about teacher supply is one factor which has created pressure to recruit more teaching assistants, in order both to make teaching a more attractive profession and, on one analysis, to ensure that the there are sufficient numbers of education professionals in schools to achieve the Government’s agenda of raising standards particularly in Literacy and Numeracy. Teaching assistants have effectively been linked to the raising standards agenda and as such have become centre stage in the Government’s agenda for education. Since 2002, the Government has been developing proposals for workforce reform throughout the public sector. Within education, plans for workforce reform are well developed and focus particularly on the development of an enhanced role for teaching assistants. Standards for Higher Level Teaching Assistants (HLTAs) have been published by the TTA, and organisations have begun assessing HLTAs against these standards. It is interesting to note the similarities between the standards for the award of QTS and the HLTA standards. Additionally, in 2004 the TTA has awarded contracts for bidders for developing training for aspiring HLTAs over a fifty day period. In short, there is a further professionalisation of teaching assistants and recognition of their contribution to the education service. Thus there has been a gradual enhancement of the role of the teaching assistant in England over a long period of time, at first as a partially unintended consequence of educational reform in the 1980s, latterly as an increasingly high profile policy shift. A review of the literature and our own research in this field leads us to suggest that there are at least six empowering circumstances which need to be in place if there is an adequate opportunity for teaching assistants to develop as reflective practitioners. In this sense we see an empowering circumstance as a set of conditions which need to be present if reflective practice is to become a reality. Within this paper we focus mainly on reflection–on–action (Schon 1983), reflection that occurs after the event, a retrospective consideration of the characteristics, successes and weak points of the teaching and learning activity that has occurred. Schon (1983) distinguished between two kinds of knowledge: ‘technical rationality’ and ‘experiential knowledge’. Technical and rational knowledge is the more abstract knowledge which professionals learn from sources outside themselves; for example the ‘facts’ and ‘theories’ they encounter during training or from reading authoritative texts. Experiential knowledge is the knowledge professionals develop through their own experiences and engagement in professional activities. Schon argued that practitioners are not limited to gaining abstract knowledge, but suggested they can also gain knowledge through experience. Reflection, he argues, is an important vehicle for drawing upon this knowledge derived from practice. Following Schon, in this paper, reflection is defined as solving problems through organised and careful thinking about possible alternatives and then choosing the most appropriate course of action (or inaction). However, reflection is more than simply reviewing events. Reflection involves interrogating an experience by asking searching questions about that experience (Bourner, 2003). In order to arrive at a perspective on the extent to which reflection is an important, value and worthwhile concept for teaching assistants it is important to identify the empowering circumstances which allow reflection to occur. We believe that the extent to which these circumstances are present will define, potentially, the quality, quantity and type of reflective practice that is apparent in today’s teaching assistant workforce. Whilst there is not yet a large literature relating to teaching assistants that which there is suggests that there is considerable variation within these empowering circumstances. It appears, for example, that the role is enacted in different ways in different contexts. It is also apparent that the deployment of teaching assistants varies considerably from one school to another. Because there appears to be considerable variation in the empowering circumstances for reflection, we go on to argue that there is also considerable variation in the characteristics and depth of reflective practice. We now wish to consider the empowering circumstances one by one. 1. Personal qualities such as experience, open-mindedness, responsibility and whole-heartedness. Open-mindedness, responsibility and whole-heartedness are three qualities which Pollard (2002) identified as being characteristic of reflective teaching. Here we argue that these personal qualities are as important to teaching assistants as they are to teachers. Moreover, as many untrained parent helpers and teaching assistants in schools exhibit highly levels of reflection, we argue that these are qualities which can be held irrespective of the context in which people work. Reflection is not necessarily something learned on a course. Nevertheless, whatever a person’s starting point, reflection can be identified and developed in a similar way to that in which one might identify and develop critical thinking. Both require the individual to go beyond what is given (be it reading or experience) and to ask the difficult question of what is being presented and to learn from the answers to the process. Both can be identified, taught or encouraged and assessed. They’re just children, don’t put so much pressure on them, let them enjoy their childhood if they do good in SATS there’s too much pressure. There is lots of pressure and the kids get upset and the parents get anxious. They start so early, three and four and they start, that structure starts at that age doesn’t it, I mean in the rest of Europe they don’t start school six do they; they have three years of nursery where they can just play. There have been lots of studies [which] said that early childhood tests don’t bear any resemblance to what the child will achieve in later life (Conversation between Sirat, Shehnaz and Robina) Open-mindedness is one of a number of qualities which individuals may need to begin to make sense of their environment. First, teaching assistants need to be open-minded enough to continue learning and acquiring new skills and experiences throughout their career. Second, they need to recognise the perpetually changing climate in which they work and to be open-minded enough to constantly adapt to it. Third, they need to recognise their own changing agendas, needs and wants and more importantly the changing agendas, needs and wants of the children they teach. Finally, they need to be open-minded enough to be able to work within complex changing situations and to act and react to circumstances when prior knowledge is of no help. Whole-heartedness could be defined as meaning with enthusiasm and energy. Certainly, the experience of being in a classroom is significantly enhanced if the person in charge is enthusiastic about their work and about the subject they are teaching. However, whole-heartedness can also mean with ones’ whole self. As Bolton (2001, p 11) argues, reflective teachers, ‘do not leave their personalities, their souls, their senses of humour, their fragilities outside the classroom’. Like reflective teachers, reflective teaching assistants are prepared to bring as much of their whole selves into the teaching situation as is appropriate. Reflective teaching assistants are comfortable and confident with who they are and are able to respond to the children and the subject they teach in a genuine and open manner. You want somebody there that will help your child so there is more feeling and you’re more companionate towards the other children where as you, I think [teaching assistants have] got more time to spend with the individual child or with a group of children that are struggling you tend to put them under your wing and just concentrate on them. (Sirat) Responsibility in reflective practice relates to what Nias (1989 p 160) refers to as the ‘individualistic, solitary and personal’ nature of primary teaching. Teaching assistants work with other professionals in the classroom. Nevertheless, much of their work is with small groups of children often outside the classroom and consequently they empathise with the notion that working with primary aged children requires ‘a high level of self-expenditure’ (Nias, 1989, p 160) and a high level of confidence in who you are as well as what you can do. I only do literacy I don’t do maths, science or anything else, and I get to do my own planning and carry out my own lessons, but I do sit with the teacher like once a week and we talk to each other about ideas and the lesson plans I’m using and what worked and what hasn’t worked and how I should go about doing it next time, and if it hasn’t worked why and what the teacher needs to do and what I should to make that work or amend it or if she hasn’t then why, or if the children are not picking up what I am doing then we talk to each other and see how we can improve the lesson and how to go about doing it next time. (Robina) As illustrated above, reflection can be related to a number of personal qualities which are exhibited by teaching assistants and teachers alike. However, as the rest of this paper will demonstrate, reflection can be empowered or inhibited by a range of circumstances. 2. Clarity of the role of teaching assistant, including how this role is perceived by others. One factor which links to the quality and characteristics of reflection is concerned with clarity of role. Here, we argue that if the role of the teaching assistant is clear, then it is more likely that reflective practice will become apparent. Yet, it is apparent that for a variety of reasons a clearly defined role, or set of roles, may not yet have widespread currency in schools, even though in policy terms much work has occurred through the remodelling of the workforce agenda. Here the DfES issued guidance in 2003, (following the reaching of a national agreement with unions and professional associations) which aimed to clarify respective roles of teachers and support staff and to define the circumstances where support staff may carry out work linked to the core teaching and learning functions of schools (DfES 2003). The National Re-Modelling Team (NRT) is currently working with LEAs and schools to implement the workforce reform agreement. It will be important that further research is undertaken to investigate whether, over time, the national re-modelling agenda has led to greater clarity of roles for teaching assistants. At the current time, there is an explicit recognition that there is some lack of clarity in roles and responsibilities. The DfES comment: There are now many more support staff employed in schools, working alongside qualified teachers in a wide variety of roles. For some time there has been uncertainty about what duties and activities these support staff may or may not undertake. (DfES 2003, p.5) The emergence of teaching assistants in England as a major part of the education profession has been both dynamic and rapid. It is also significant that there is a proliferation both of titles and roles. Lee (2002) identifies classroom assistants, learning support assistants, special support assistants, special needs assistants, specialist teacher assistants, general assistants, nursery nurses, bilingual support staff and administrative support staff. However, this list is far from definitive (see for example, Hancock and Colloby, in press). Additionally, Higher Level Teaching Assistants (HLTA) is a term which has emerged over the last couple of years and describes advanced teaching assistants who are very much at the forefront of workforce reform. It is equally clear that there are wide variations in the actual roles of `teaching assistants’ from working with individual children (with or without special educational needs), working with small groups of children, producing additional curriculum materials, and working in certain situations with whole classes. Our research illustrates that sometimes teaching assistants’ roles are defined almost by default. Insufficient bilingual teaching staff means that teaching assistants, often the least qualified staff in the school, fulfil a critically important role within the education system. Without formal training in acting as an interpreter, the process of language acquisition or assessment procedures, bilingual TAs play a pivotal role in the assessment of some of the most vulnerable children in the education system. This level of support is extended to parents who need an interpreter. Sometimes they [parents] don’t understand and they come to us and they say can you read this for me because I don’t understand and we do that, and letters they bring them in and say can you read it for me… (Nazeem) In addition to variations in roles, it is also interesting to note that professional development opportunities have arguably been somewhat fragmented. For example, for Higher Level Teaching Assistants, the advent of Foundation Degrees has been a significant and important step, but during 2003-2004 there was some lack of clarity concerning the juxtaposition between these and training/assessment for HLTA status. For teaching assistants a separate framework exists based on levels 2 and 3 of the National Occupational Standards (NOS). From this analysis, two things are apparent. Firstly, the term `teaching assistant’ is an umbrella term that includes a very wide variety of titles, roles, responsibilities and qualifications. Secondly, it is arguable that if reflection is to be a strong characteristic of a person’s enactment of that role, then there needs to be clarity about the role and widespread understanding of this within the school community. Reflection in the professional context is partially dependent on the clarity in the reflective relationships that exist amongst key `reflective players’. By way of example we refer to Edwards and Collison’s (1996) research which explores the mentoring relationship between teachers and initial teacher education students. There is broad clarity about the role of teacher as mentor and the role of the student as mentee. In regard to teaching assistants we would argue that because the role is new, because it is diffuse and because it operates in different ways in different schools there is currently some lack of clarity about the role of teaching assistant. In turn this may not create a ubiquitously positive context for reflection. 3. Arrangements for the deployment of teaching assistants. We have established that available evidence suggests there is considerable variation in roles which teaching assistants fulfil. It is also the case that there is similar variation in the arrangements for the deployment of teaching assistants by teachers and headteachers. Generally, there is a move away from teaching assistants being employed to work with individual children to one where they are working with groups or classes of children (Lee 2002). Increasingly, TAs who are deemed confident and competent are asked to cover for teachers during planned and unplanned absences. [we have started] taking class as well when the teachers away instead of having a supply in we take the class so we are responsible for the children. (Sirat) In primary schools the advent of the National Numeracy and Literacy strategies in the late 1990s has led to teaching assistants being very closely involved in the delivery of key government initiatives, through for example being involved in working with groups of children during guided reading or writing activities (Hancock 2001). Moreover, bilingual teaching assistants are able to assess the children in their preferred language and are consequently invaluable in terms of determining the specific and special needs of the children they work with. We assess children who arrive from overseas with no English, we assess them and because we don’t want them to go into the special needs register straight away after we assess them if we think it’s the language that’s holding them back we don’t put them on special needs. What tends to happen is they just go on the special education needs register and therefore special educational needs when it’s just the language that’s holding them back. (Shehnaz) In some cases, fragmentation of deployment might occur if teaching assistants are working across classes or sets and additionally, as Hancock goes on to observe, some teaching assistants may be asked to act as rapid deployment to classes where there are particular needs. Moreover, Mistry et al (2004) put forward case study research evidence to suggest that “the management and direction of Learning Support Assistants (LSAs) does not always appear to be clearly or effectively structured” (p.125). The research presents a picture where there is ambiguity in the arrangements for the deployment of teaching assistants. Whilst managers may have a vision for the role of teaching assistants, this is not always realised through their deployment. In terms of the relationship between deployment and reflection, we argue that there are some push and pull factors. Push factors may include enhanced opportunities for teaching assistants. To become involved in the delivery of key national initiatives such as the strategies provides an opportunity for teaching assistants to be at the forefront of key agendas and this creates a context where reflection and professional dialogue is more important. To work with groups rather than individuals provides richer and more extensive opportunities for reflection because a more complex social context is introduced into the reflective arena (although it is also the case that working with individuals provides deep reflective opportunities). A noticeable pull factor could be the danger of fragmentation where a teaching assistant is working across too many contexts sometimes at short notice and is not involved in planning or evaluative activity. 4. The extent to which teachers are explicitly reflective practitioners involved in reflective activity. A further empowering circumstance relates to the extent to which the teacher is explicitly reflective. The argument we wish to develop is that this empowering circumstance is of a different nature. Other empowering circumstances are dependent on the structures and arrangements for teaching assistants, the clarity of their role, how they are deployed, the steps that have been taken to professionalise them and the nature of the teams within which they work. It strikes us that it is important to single out the teacher’s approach to reflection as a separate empowering circumstance. If a teacher understands and exercises reflective practice, it is presumably more likely that a teaching assistant will develop characteristics of reflection. This is not to say that an experienced teaching assistant needs to depend on a teacher as a precursor to the development of reflection, as that teaching assistant may already have expertise in reflection. It is to say however that if a teacher has a disposition to reflection, then this will help to ensure that the reflective activity of both teaching assistant and teacher is enhanced through rich professional dialogue. For example, one teaching assistant talks about how she worked with the class teacher to change the way in which children were grouped in preparation for the SATs. what we did this year was pair two children, one with more ability and one with low ability and they showed each other, they worked out the question and the answer, and then they talked about it, how did you get yours and so they got ideas from each other and I think that benefited them a lot because they are so used to, you teach them one way (inaudible) as a child I think it gets more out of different approaches, I think its worked really well. (Sirat) In many ways the notion of reflective practice for teachers has been reconceptualised over the last few years as it is now operationalised through mentoring. The advent of partnership in Initial Teacher Education, the new arrangements for the induction year, peer appraisal and performance management have all created contexts where teachers have been encouraged to develop mentoring skills. The proliferation of these mentoring contexts has in turn implicitly sharpened teachers’ focus on reflection-on-action (Schon 1983) because new structures and procedures have developed which encourage and facilitate mentoring activities. Pollard (2002) identifies specific forms of mentoring such as mentoring conversations, role modelling of good teaching and observation of this, collaborative teaching and analysis, the provision of written feedback, and assessment of teaching. As mentoring has developed an enhanced profile over the last ten years or so, many teachers have developed new skills and understandings relating to professional development through dialogue. A key issue is the extent to which these skills and understandings are transferred to the relationship between a teaching assistant and a teacher. Whilst a teaching assistant and a teacher may not be in quite the same relationship as a teacher and a student teacher or a teacher and a NQT, there are clear parallels and clear opportunities for reflection to occur. Moreover, the establishment of higher level teaching assistants and learning mentors will increase the likelihood of teaching assistants mentoring each other (Cable, Eyres and Collins, in press). Sixsmith and Simco (1997) put forward a model which shows the role of mentor as reflective agent. Through a process of negotiating a teaching activity, clearly defining responsibilities within this, and then evaluating this from different perspectives an opportunity is created for reflection and ensuing action. In order for this empowering circumstance to be realised, there are perhaps two things need to occur. First, it is important that the teacher understands explicitly the nature of reflection and how it is manifest within mentoring contexts. From this the ability to discern transferability to the teaching assistant/teacher context is vital. Secondly, it is important that adequate time is given to planning and evaluating activity because this is the context where the rich professional dialogue is likely to occur. However, there is little time for collaboration during the school day. Few teaching assistants are paid to attend staff meetings or planning meetings. This means that time to plan and reflect is reduced to break times and lunch breaks, which may be staggered. Alternatively, teaching assistants may agree to work additional hours without pay assuming that this fits in with their child care arrangements. Teaching assistant who work with individuals alone or in small groups often take on a huge responsibility in planning work for those children and in providing feedback as to how children are progressing. They [children] come with the modules but I have made my own now. As you go through the year you pick up your own ideas and make your own stuff then, (Nazeem) Where joint planning can take place there is some evidence that teachers may underestimate teaching assistants’ abilities and that the lack of time for pre- and post- lesson discussions is an issue in developing the quality of dialogue required for reflective conversation (Lee 2002). 5. The attributes of teams operating within the classroom setting. We have already defined an empowering circumstance that relates to clarity of role. In one sense part of `clarity of role’ is concerned with the extent to which a team approach is evident in the classroom or school setting. In the school in which we carried out our interviews the teaching assistants felt that they were treated with the same respect as the teachers. They feel that this is due to the fact that they represent a large and well established group in the staffroom. Many have been at the school longer than the head teacher and many of the teaching staff. Their training and support from the authority has also played a role in empowering them and enabling them to speak their minds. If there is a strong team ethos where professional dialogue is mature and questioning, then arguably the empowering circumstance will be created for reflection. The essence of reflection lies within the professional dialogue that occurs between practitioners, a process of sharing of experience, of seeking alternatives, of justifying, of defining a course of action, and even of challenging the status quo. This may take place among teaching assistants or with members of school or advisory staff. If, conversely there is a dominant hierarchical model with the teacher directing the teaching assistant, then the potential for reflection is perhaps lessened. Whilst reflection can be a solitary activity, it is arguable that solitary reflection has less potential to achieve a depth of reflection, when compared with reflective activity that involves ongoing professional dialogue. Hancock (2001) identifies considerable variation in the extent to which classroom teams are created. In some situations there is effectively a team between the teacher and the teaching assistant whilst in others the teaching assistant is more reactive to the teacher’s requests and direction. The teaching assistants we interviewed felt that the distinction between the role of the teacher and that of the teaching assistant could become blurred especially when working with younger children. Like in the classroom you are together [with the teacher] and working together and it’s a nice atmosphere. because the parents don’t know whether I’m a support staff or a teacher, we often see people [together] As they [children] get older they do realise that you’re the support. They know in our year group that we are the support, we are the junior support (inaudible) in Year 3 and 4 they definitely know that you are the support and the teacher is the teacher. (conversation between Shehnaz and Sirat) Moreover, it is important to recognise that the creation of a team is not something that can necessarily happen by osmosis. It needs careful nurturing and development. This point is considered by Thomas (1992). It has been assumed that people would slide effortlessly into the classroom…But a decade of experience has shown us what we should have appreciated at the outset: groups and teams are fragile, fickle creatures. Bringing people together to work on a project - especially if they aren’t prepared to do it – can do more harm than good. To work well they need a lot of help. (Thomas 1992, p.197) All this suggests that the achievement of this empowering circumstance very much depends on the creation of a team where the teaching assistant is a full and essentially equal member of that team. Such an achievement may not necessarily be straightforward. 6. The status and recognition attributed to teaching assistants. This empowering circumstance is concerned with the relationship between recognition, status and refection. We argue that enhanced status and recognition are derived from the enhanced profile of teaching assistants within the education service. As teaching assistants are given enhanced recognition they assume a professional identity. It seems reasonable to assert that the acquisition of this professional identity is more likely to create circumstances for reflection because being reflective is part of being professional. For the teaching assistants we interviewed professional identity is not related to salary or career development. I think it’s the satisfaction you get out of this job we don’t, I mean we never thought about the money. It’s the peace of mind I think we’re, I mean if you’re happy somewhere you don’t think about money. I can get a lot of money, a huge salary but if I’m not happy what am I going to do with that salary, it’s the happiness the atmosphere. For us two or three with young families so we get both of it come here and go home, we’re normal like. (Conversation between Sirat, Shehnaz and Robina) Having a job which fits around child care and domestic responsibilities is particularly important for some of the teaching assistants we interviewed. There is little doubt that since new Labour came to power in 1997 and introduced the notion of workforce reform in various areas of the public sector that enhanced status has been attributed to teaching assistants. There is recognition, at national level, that teaching assistants are fundamental to raising standards and there have been a number of moves to professionalise teaching assistants. These relate to the definition of a career structure, the development of more opportunities for professional development, the application of activities such as appraisal to teaching assistants and a move to identify clear roles and responsibilities through national agreement. Together this enhanced status should provide an empowering circumstance for reflection as, within education, one normal element of a professional context is the opportunity to reflect. A key issue for further research will be the extent to which there is a gap between the national moves to professionalise teaching assistants and the acceptance of this within individual schools. To what extent do individual schools value teaching assistants and ascribe professional status and recognition' Lorenz (1998) suggests that there are sometimes problems with communication and that teaching assistants may work from very little information. Whilst it is true to say that much has changed at policy level since 1998, an important issue for investigation will be the extent to which teaching assistants receive recognition and enhanced status from the perspective of schools and teachers. A survey produced for the National Union of Teachers (Neill S.R., St J 2002) hints at an interesting dilemma. On the one hand the survey reveals a large proportion of respondents feel that teaching assistants should be paid more as their responsibilities expand. On the other hand there is a clear view that the boundary between teachers and teaching assistants should be maintained. The professionalisation of teaching assistants is not the same as teaching assistants becoming quasi teachers. None of the teaching assistants we interviewed wanted to become a teacher. Teachers have too much to do, I mean they even work in their lunch hours, their free time, break times; they’re constantly working after school. (Rabina) However, the number of teaching assistants beginning foundation degrees with the intention of becoming teachers suggests that, in this respect at least, those we interviewed are not typical. One particular aspect of status and recognition relates to professional updating and development. Mention has already been made of the qualificatory framework for teaching assistants, including the development of new standards for Higher Level Teaching Assistants and the plethora of qualifications including NVQs, and the specialist teaching assistant course (STA). It is also true that one survey (Lee and Mawson 1998) found that ¾ of primary teaching assistants have attended a training course between 1995-1998. However an important issue relates to the extent to which teaching assistants have been prepared to reflect within professional contexts. Is the training `skilling up’ or concerned with knowledge acquisition or is it more conceptual in nature' Specifically, do teaching assistants have the opportunity to receive professional development which enables them to acquire reflective strategies' Lee (2002) has surveyed a numbers of studies and has suggested that content covers areas such as working with teachers, the development of materials and activities, understanding more about specific learning or other activities and the development of knowledge of particular subjects. No explicit reference is made to preparation for reflection. This view is also considered by Potter and Richardson who cite Wellington (1996). Little attention has been given, however, to the need to develop the ability of classroom assistants to reflect critically upon their work, although the capacity to evaluate one’s own practice has long been accepted as a fundamental aspect of a teacher’s professional development (Potter and Richardson, 1999, p.34) Potter and Richardson go on to consider the use of video in facilitating classroom assistants’ professional reflection and it is also true that some course text books for teaching assistants make explicit reference to the need to reflect at depth as this will be necessary to meet the National Occupational Standards at level 3 (e.g. Watkinson 2003, Alfrey 2003). However the central issue is that for a long time reflective activity has been an integral and important part of initial teacher education, but this has not often featured as part of professional development for teaching assistants we suspect partly because until recently the role of teaching assistants has not been closely defined. We have suggested that the six empowering circumstances identified can, potentially be related to the quality of reflective practice apparent within the work of teaching assistants in schools. In order to develop this idea further, it is necessary to define what we mean by the quality of reflective practice. One approach here is to describe different levels of reflection. McIntytre (1993), for example, describes three levels, technical, practical and critical, whilst Gaye and Gaye (1998) consider five types of what they call reflection-on-practice. It strikes us that this typology may be particularly useful in providing a framework for the analysis of reflective practice. Descriptive reflection-on-practice and perceptive reflection-on-practice are both retrospective. In the former kind the reflective practitioner merely articulates what occurred in the classroom, whilst in the latter links are made between this articulation and their personal feelings about it. A third kind of reflection is termed receptive reflection-on-practice. This involves the practitioner justifying his reflective comments in the light of others’ views or practices. In this sense there is an openness to the views of others and how these views connect with those of the practitioner. Finally, critical reflection-on-practice is concerned with an understanding of the place of the activity within the wider education system. It involves a constructively questioning approach to the status quo within the classroom or school. This provisional research raises a number of questions for further consideration. • Do we need to develop an empirical measure of empowering circumstances for reflection' • Are there other empowering circumstances that are not cited' • Are some empowering circumstances more significant than others and does the depend on the aim of the reflection' • How can we begin to test whether there is a relationship between empowering circumstances and levels of reflection' • To what extent, if at all, do the characteristics of reflective practice differ between teachers and teaching assistants' It is in our view important that these questions are explored further. The centrality of teaching assistants in the government’s plans for re-modelling the workforce strongly suggests that teaching assistants are becoming very rapidly a highly significant and recognised part of the education service. The professionalisation of teaching assistants reflects the enhanced responsibility that they have been given. Yet it is also apparent that there is an opportunity to be seized. Re-modelling is at a relatively early stage and there is the opportunity for the benefits associated with reflective practice to be fully built into the development of their role. If this occurs then we would suggest that the benefits which the teaching assistant role brings to the education service in England will be realised. References Alfrey, C (Ed). (2003) Understanding Children’s Learning: A Text for Teaching Assistants. London: David Fulton. Baker, P. and Eversley, J. (2000) Multilingual Capital: The Language of London’s School Children and their Relevance to Economic, Social and Educational Policies. London: Battlebridge. Bourner T, (2003) ‘Assessing Reflective Learning’, Education and Training, Vol 45, No 5, pp 267-272. Cable, C., Eyres, I. and Collins, J. (in press) Inclusive Teaching Assistants. Manchester: BERA 2004 Department for Education and Science (1978) Special Educational Needs, Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People. London: HMSO. Department for Education and Skills (2003) Time for Standards: Guidance accompanying the Section 133 Regulations issued under the Education Act 2002. London: DfES. Department for Education and Skills, (2004) Pupils Level Annual School Census http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/sccwebsite/sccwspublications.nsf/docidLookupFileResourcesByUNID, accessed 6th Sept 04 Edwards, A. and Collison, J. (1996) Mentoring and Developing Practice in Primary Schools: Supporting Student-Teacher Learning in Schools. Buckingham: Open University Press. Gaye, A. and Gaye, K. (1998) Teaching and Learning through Critical Reflective Practice. London: David Fulton. Lee, B. (2002) Teaching Assistants in Schools: The Current State of Play. Slough: NFER. Lee, B. and Mawson, C. (1998) Survey of Classroom Assistants. Slough: NFER. Hancock, R. (2001) Classroom Assistants in the Primary School: Employment and Deployment. Buckingham: Open University Press. Hancock, R. and Colloby, J. (in press) Eight Titles and Roles. In Hancock, R. and Collins, J. (Eds) Teaching Assistants Today: Learners and Learning. London: David Fulton. Lorenz, S. (1998) Effective In-Class Support. The Management of staff in Mainstream and Special Schools. London: David Fulton. McIntyre, D (1993) Theory, Theorising and Reflection in Initial Teacher Education, in Calderhead J. and Gates P. (Eds) Conceptualising Reflection in Teacher Development. London: The Falmer Press. Mistry, M. Burton, N, and Brundrett, M. (2004) `Managing LSAS: an Evaluation of Learning Support Assistants in an Urban Primary School’, School Leadership and Management, 24, 2, 125-137. Neill,S.R.St.J. (2002) Teaching Assistants: a survey analysed for the national union of Teachers by the University of Warwick Institute of Education Teacher Research and Development Unit. Warwick: University of Warwick. Pollard, A. (2002) Reflective Teaching. London: Contiuum. Potter, C.A. and Richardson, H.L. (1999) `Facilitating Classroom Assistants’ Professional Reflection through Video Workshops`, British Journal of Special Education, 26, 1, 34-36. Sage, R and Wilkie, M (2003) Supporting Learning in Primary Schools. Exeter: Learning Matters. Schon, D.A. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. London: Jossey Bass. Schon, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books. Sixsmith, S.C. and Simco, N. (1997) `The role of formal and informal theory in the training of student teachers’, Mentoring and Tutoring, 5, 1, 5-13. Thomas, G. (1992) Effective Classroom Teamwork: Support or Intrusion' London: Routledge. Watkinson, A. (2003) The Essential Guide for Experienced Teaching Assistants. London: David Fulton. Wellington, B. (1996) ` Orientations to Reflective Practice’, Educational Research, 38, 3, 307-316.