Research partnerships for the scaling of teacher professional development in Argentina

Sebastián Fuentes and Daniel Pinkasz
FLACSO – Argentina

The ESCAL.Ar project: Models for Teacher Professional Development in Early Literacy, Argentina aims to understand the factors and conditions that influence the professional development of primary school teachers in early literacy in two Argentine provinces, Salta and Misiones. The project focuses on the analysis of continuous teacher training programs that utilize a collaborative model among teachers, with tutoring and situated support aiming to move beyond standardized and decontextualized models. We are interested in exploring these types of initiatives and the achievements they have made while also identifying gaps in teachers’ access to professional development programs in these provinces. This will help us to imagine and co-design possible scaling scenarios with provincial governments and technical teams.

To achieve this, we have adopted a collaborative working style with – and as a form of collaboration for – the ministries of education of both provinces. This is rooted in our belief that the knowledge we produce should incorporate local perspectives and contribute to provincial management efforts. In this sense, we consider it essential for these stakeholders to position themselves as part of the project from the outset. Expertise and existing knowledge gain new meaning and are revalued when they are mobilized for new initiatives, such as ESCAL.Ar.

Everyone knows something about TPD: An open field of knowledge

The careful and systematic incorporation of the perspectives of the involved stakeholders creates a repertoire of available knowledge on teacher professional development (TPD), which influences the methodological design of the ESCAL.Ar study.

Our decision to co-construct the issue of teacher professional development with stakeholders challenges the traditional view of research as linear. Typically, research begins with fieldwork preparation in the first phase, continues with data collection and production in the second, and ends with data processing in the third. In contrast, in ESCAL.Ar the initial conversations with stakeholders have been part of the information production process and have led to adjustments in thinking of the research team. Although we had conducted a preliminary inquiry in the provinces to inform our research proposal development, that inquiry was more exploratory in nature. We were able to identify TPD programs for the inquiry, gauge the interest and willingness of provincial authorities to participate in our project, gather information, and make initial contact with relevant stakeholders. Building on these actions, we comprehensively mapped the stakeholders involved in TPD at the start of ESCAL.Ar through sustained dialogue, incorporating various contributions and perspectives into our research design.

In traditional research design, the problem, hypotheses, and research questions are usually formulated based on a body of knowledge found in specialized literature that has been studied. This body of knowledge is interpreted through the perspective and experience of those who formulate the project. In this way, an object of study is constructed from ‘outside’ the object, creating a standard object, so to speak, with a high level of abstraction. In ESCAL.Ar, on the other hand, listening to stakeholders and immersing ourselves in the field brought us closer to the object. This closeness enables a spiral understanding through conversations that bring us closer to a core issue, helping to define an object around which debates, interests, and stakes are formed: each actor, whether individual or institutional, constructs their own approach to teacher education. These systematic conversations with various stakeholders allow us to design inquiry tools—such as interviews and surveys—with a deeper understanding of local dynamics and particularities. We progress through successive approximations, broadening, deepening, reviewing, and sharing the available knowledge with stakeholders in a gradual manner, subjecting the knowledge generated from different sources to mutual validation.

This approach involves sequential yet reflective fieldwork, where some of the dimensions and questions in the instruments are adjusted according to findings from previous stages. Thus, we as researchers are not the only ones reflecting on our object of inquiry; we do so in conversation with stakeholders, involving them in discussions of key aspects of the project. For example, we address with them topics like GESI (Gender, Equality and Social Inclusion), literacy language policies in intercultural bilingual education (EIB), and the training of EIB teachers. We also share a review of existing national and provincial TPD offerings, and present provincial data such as number of schools, attendance rate in primary education (Cine 1) and provincial socio-educational indicators, organized on dashboards for better visualization and ease of use.

An open and situated inquiry into the challenges and successes of TPD

There are times when the work of a research team creates opportunities for those involved in the management of educational policy. In the ESCAL.Ar project, when we bring together technical and political teams from the ministries, a sense of recognition emerges, often expressed as: “It’s great that we have time to meet and create spaces for reflection!” This statement highlights the common challenge of sharing knowledge, doubts, and successes that the ministry teams responsible for TPD encounter in their daily work.

In our meetings, we bring together, for example, those responsible for the TPD programs under study, coordinators of rural education and EIB, along with primary school supervisors. Such gatherings are rare in provincial work dynamics, as these actors typically work towards the goals of their own areas, in different offices, buildings, and regions. The opportunity to come together, think collectively, and even engage in heated discussions is uncommon. The appreciation for the opportunities facilitated by the ESCAL.Ar project is within this context.

At this stage, the process of contextualizing the generic and theoretical object of inquiry we previously discussed gains meaning. Recently, in a meeting with the provincial teams, we asked them:

“What political, cultural, budgetary, technological, organizational, curricular, and pedagogical factors or conditions influence the development of continuous teacher training for early literacy, according to the different zones or departments of the province?”

This question brings the abstract object into a concrete, localized framework, allowing for a deeper understanding of how various factors shape TPD in each specific context. The responses were mapped onto a geographic and political map of the province. One supervisor explained that in a rural school located in the Alta Montaña, teachers have to climb onto the school roof to get a mobile phone signal. When they need to send an official communication or document, they know the teacher will respond the next Saturday, when they travel from that rural area to a town with better Internet connectivity. In such contexts, it is not feasible to think about permanent access to online TPD. However, it is possible to envision partial accessibility through a proposal that considers viable connectivity modalities for those school locations.

Other supervisors and teacher trainers shared the challenges faced in schools when assigning teachers to the first grades of primary education, where initial literacy learning takes place. In many contexts, the most qualified and experienced teachers, who may have the training and expertise for early literacy, tend to prefer assignments in higher grades. So, who takes on the responsibility for literacy in the first cycle of primary education? It appears that this task often falls to novice teachers with lower levels of training, many of whom are just starting their careers and often serve as substitutes in unstable positions.

From various ministry officials and consulted specialists, we learned that some indigenous communities in the province are organized and have made progress in developing contextualized curriculum designs for their people. However, there is a gap: not all indigenous communities have the same conditions and possibilities to organize and raise claims, or they don’t pursue the same types of demands for the inclusion of indigenous languages in the literacy process at the primary level.

As we learned about the factors that addressed our question, the same stakeholders provided valuable insights on how to conduct fieldwork. They offered informed opinions, for instance, on whether sending an online survey form would be effective; whether it is necessary to consider teachers’ seniority in the research instruments to determine if it influences access to continuous training—based on preferences and availability for training in early literacy; or if we need more systematic data on the challenges faced by teachers working in the context of EIB during bilingual literacy. The contribution of this situated information also allowed us to add specific notes for addressing the object of inquiry. For example, in the province of Misiones, which borders Brazil and Paraguay, the use of Portuguese and its blend with Spanish known as Portuñol, along with Guaraní, set a more complex scenario for the TPD. This linguistic diversity within families and communities affects communication and learning methods, which also requires special attention to promote the literacy of students.

This situated understanding of the challenges of TPD, which is also contextual, is unusual in TPD studies and presents a significant opportunity. The stakeholders’ ownership of the research process is reflected in what occurs during this process—working meetings on specific topics, listening to other ministry members, and feedback and dialogue with researchers. This engagement is interesting and useful for them, enhancing their understanding of their work, its reach, and its limitations.

In line with the principles of TPD@Scale that we are developing within the ETI network, the ESCAL.Ar project aims to foster exchanges organized around mutual recognition and respect. This approach allows for an open discussion of the challenges, issues, and successes that each actor identifies, enabling a rethinking and scaling of professional development programs that focus on early literacy as a goal.

Acknowledgement and disclaimer

Our research is being carried out with the aid of a grant from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Ottawa, Canada, as part of the “Empowering Teachers Initiative: Teacher Professional Development at Scale,” a global research for development program jointly implemented by the Foundation for Information Technology Education and Development (FIT-ED) and SUMMA under the TPD@Scale Coalition for the Global South. The views expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of IDRC or its Board of Governors, FIT-ED, SUMMA, or the Coalition or any of its members. The full research team in FLACSO includes Andrea Brito, Nancy Montes, Sandra Ziegler (principal researchers); Franco Balaguer, Alfonsina Livio, Ana Pedrini (field research assistants); Adriana Díaz, Carolina Gamba, Silvia González, Valeria Odetti; Mercedes Oviedo Montaña, Juan Suasnábar, Virginia Unamuno (specialist consultants).

About the authors

Dr. Sebastián Fuentes is a researcher at CONICET, based in the Education, Knowledge and Society Programme (Education Area), at FLACSO, Argentina. He holds a degree in Philosophy, a Master’s in Social Sciences with a focus on Education, and a PhD from IDAES/UNSAM, where he studied education and sports sociability among elites in Buenos Aires. His research explores socio-educational inequalities, youth experiences, and gender relations, with a focus on educational policies and social inclusion. Dr. Fuentes has contributed to various academic groups, and participated in international projects such as the GLOBALSPORT initiative at the University of Amsterdam.

Mg Daniel Pinkasz holds a degree in Education and a Master’s degree in Political Science with a specialisation in Education from FLACSO. He is a member of the research team of the Education, Knowledge and Society Programme (Education Area) at FLACSO and is a teaching researcher at the National University of General Sarmiento in the area of History and Politics of Education. His areas of interest are the study of educational policies, the relationship between educational policies and the production and use of knowledge, and the history of education. He has worked in public service and has been a consultant for national and international organisations: Ministry of Education, OEI, IIEP-UNESCO, UNICEF.