This paper attempts to analyse sections of Fielding's 'non-deterministic' model of teacher development from a curriculum perspective. The need for such an analysis is obvious, since there has been a spate of reports on teacher education in recent years; Auchmuty (1980) at the national level and Correy (1980) at the State (N.S.W.) level, to name just two. An implicit assumption of these reports is that there is a need to know what teacher development is, how it is being conducted in institutions, if it can be improved and if so, how. Such reports often suffer a similar fate; the rhetoric in them rapidly wanes. Fielding's attempt to construct a model of teacher development conceivably might provide one of those conceptual frameworks which official reports seem notoriously unable to suggest. At any rate, his model seems worth an attempt at critical analysis. In analysing the model I have used the notion of a paradigm shift (Kuhn 1974), coupled with an underlying curriculum perspective.
Teacher Development : Curricular Problems and Paradigm Possibilities.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 8(2).