Teachers in fragile and crisis contexts face enormous barriers to quality professional development. This is not news to most readers. But what are these barriers and how can we begin to address or reverse engineer professional development? This post outlines some of these obstacles. Most of the information in this post is taken from research and from the discussions that informed the publication of the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) guide, Where it’s needed most: Quality professional development for all teachers.

Barrier #1: Difficult working conditions

Not surprisingly, the greatest barrier to quality professional development in fragile contexts is the difficult conditions in which teachers work. The lack of (irregular, delayed or low) remuneration, overcrowded classrooms, the potential for (or probability of) sexual harassment or abuse, a lack of respect from school leaders and community members, violence in, to, and from school, too many needy students, and a lack of teaching and learning materials, all contribute to such difficult working conditions. As they would be for anyone, these conditions—both discretely and cumulatively—are often highly demotivating for teachers and negatively affect three important teacher characteristics, all of which are critical to effective teaching performance.

1. Teacher identity

Many teachers in fragile contexts become teachers, not be design, but by necessity, and, as Kirk & Winthrop note, “may therefore lack a strong professional identity” or desire to strengthen that identity, even in places where respect for teachers is high and even where education is seen as important or even restorative.

2. Teacher efficacy

Teachers’ efficacy beliefs are strongly correlated with teacher performance. Teachers with high self-efficacy believe that they can teach students well and believe they have a certain degree of control over both teaching and learning process and their performance. Efficacy also relates to teacher perceptions about students—a belief that their students can succeed academically. If teachers are poorly prepared; if they receive little or inadequate professional support—particularly if they teach children with acute emotional and academic needs— they may continue to lack confidence in their own abilities as teachers. They may continue to doubt their own efficacy; they may not believe that their students can learn; and they may begin to channel these frustrations onto students—blaming them for the weaknesses of the system. It’s hard to love your job when deep down you think you are terrible at it. All of this undermines teacher-student relationships, undermines the quality of teaching and learning, undermines student learning, and undermines the notion of teaching as a desirable, even noble, profession.

3. Teacher professionalism

Difficult working conditions, low status, gender bias, and teaching in hierarchical conditions often prompt teachers to look for alternative work and/or resist any attempts to enhance increased professionalism—such as professional development—especially when teachers are not paid for extra hours or when they see professional development as not resulting in either improvements in their own practice or leading to promotion. Hierarchical, rigid education systems exacerbate this lack of professionalism by treating teachers as a problem, by not seeking their input or voice on decisions that affect teachers, and by dismissing concerns about pay or working conditions or safety. This lack of professionalism of teachers is often then a reflection of the lack of professionalism of the education system itself. Essentially, many teachers, so exhausted and worn down by this lack of professionalism, combined with the conditions in which they work, may resist change of any sort, systematic initiatives of any sort, or new ideas of any sort because they are simply trying to survive, physically or emotionally, in the face of so much adversity.

Barrier #2: Systematic challenges

Fragile countries often have fragile education systems characterized by poor leadership, limited administrative capacity or inadequate budgets. Many fragile countries are unable to provide teachers with salaries and working conditions or professional opportunities that one finds in other professions. Fragile contexts often lack qualified personnel who can help teachers master content or research, such as proven instructional or assessment strategies. And they lack systems and incentives to encourage and help teachers improve their practice.

If there is some form of professional development, its effects may be nullified by problems related to coordination between the entities that deal with professional development or between entities that evaluate teachers. There are often problems with the quality and variety of the tools used to observe and supervise teachers and provide them with feedback about their teaching.

Barrier #3: Conflict

Not every fragile country is in conflict, but conflict obviously creates Hydra-like, multilayered barriers to opportunities for teacher professional development. Holding classes for students—not to mention teachers—is often inconceivable. Even when and where professional development opportunities exist, it simply may be too dangerous for teachers to attend them. Professional development providers may be seen as too closely aligned with an unpopular government, in the case of civil conflict, and thus are potential targets. Infrastructure, such as roads, electricity, cellular networks, Internet, landlines may be destroyed, thus making any professional development, even distance learning, difficult or impossible. Additionally, professional development offered to one social group at the exclusion of another may actually contribute to the exacerbation of tension and/or violence.

Barrier #4: Poorly designed professional development

This last barrier is both a consequence of the above three (difficult working conditions, systematic challenges, and, in some cases, conflict) and a cause of the lack of access to quality professional development. Not surprisingly, in many fragile contexts, the professional development that does exist is episodic versus sustained and intensive. It often reflects budget constraints, the lack of qualified facilitators, volatility, and logistical challenges. It may often reflect policymakers’ and donors’ misunderstandings about who teachers are and what they do and how they should learn. It may occur only on a short-term basis and be disconnected from policies around teacher recruitment, assessment, retention, support, and compensation. In areas recovering from conflict or natural disaster, it may be of an emergency nature and thus not explicitly aligned with broader Ministry of Education goals and strategies. It may not take into account the tenets of adult learning or what we know to be best practices around teacher learning. It may be designed and carried out by instructors who have no teaching experience in general and no teaching experience in fragile contexts in particular. Not surprisingly, it is often perceived by teachers as being of low quality and completely irrelevant—something to be endured rather than embraced.

Not all of the above barriers can always be addressed or addressed well. But some can. What and how will be the focus of a future post.