StartseitePublikationenBernd HainmüllerIdentifying the potential for teaching

Identifying the potential for teaching

Bernd Hainmüller

Imagine you as a tourist in lovely Prague. After some visits you get hungry and you find a nice place in a small bohemian restaurant just underneath the Hradcany (1) with a lovely view of the city and the river. Unfortunately the waiter does not understand you, because he cannot speak English; he is unfriendly and bad dressed, he does not explain the main courses, he does not clean the table and the chair before you sit down. Finally, he pours half of the soup, you have ordered, on your shirt…You leave the place with the comment to the manager, that he should choose people with more potential as waiters, otherwise his business will collapse in the fu-ture…. Most of us have some kind of experiences with “good” and “bad” waiters – or some implicit imaginations about the profile of a “good” waiter. You leave with a “mental model” of this person as a good or a bad waiter, who is either well trained or not trained for this profession. If teaching is a profession too, we are now in the centre of what the European Appraisal of Potential for Teaching project (APT) tries to achieve: high quality teacher for a high quality profession of teaching.

From Assessment to Potential Analysis

Surprisingly, it was Richard Sennett´s book “The Culture of the New Capitalism” were I found the birthplace of APT[2]: The Military Academies of France in the late 17th century like the Academy of St. Cyr. Until then, the officers of the French armies had been selected from the noble classes – most important were the titles of their families. St. Cyr went a new way: their potential analyses process was open to every one and incorruptible. The candidates got numbers, no names and the exercises had a wide range from calculating the flight of different bullets to exercises, where value measures were focussed like “leadership” as an officer. Young nobles, finishing the appraisals as low achievers, were constantly rejected. Sennett emphasises the fact, that the successful leavers of St. Cyr formed a new profession: the “professional soldier“. Later, other activities followed the process of professionalisation: Law, Medicine, accountancy, business schools. Education was nearly the last sector, where Aptitude Testing was used: After World War II, when the United States felt the need to balance the academic loss of bright students through the battlegrounds, the search started to raise the potentials of young people from then more or less disadvantaged cultural backgrounds. The aim was, to create a new and fresh elite for universities like Harvard, Yale or Stanford. 

In the late 60´s some big companies started to recruit their work force by “assessment centres” (AC). They wanted to know, if a specific person, who applies for a job, fits into the profile of the work they expected of him. The need for this approach was obvious: the more complex a workspace is shaped, the less you can rely on what the applying person tells you about his for-mal qualification and earlier experiences in the field. You need tools, that allow you a more pro-found and - in the language of humanistic psychology – “deeper” entrance to the personality of the applying person. Originally, this idea did not arise from economists, but from educationalists and humanistic psychologists in the late 40´s and 50´s, when experiential psychology concen-trated in the US, due to persons like Kurt Lewin, (3) Max Horkheimer/Theodor Adorno, (4) Bruno Bettelheim, (5)  Ruth Cohn, Fritz Perls and others, who had emigrated from nazi terror. After the nazis had expelled the earlier works of John Dewey(6) from the education field in Germany, these immigrants continued to support his main features, which led a to new conversion between Education, Social Psychology and Sociology. Most of their templates – embedded later in the area of MIT's Centre for Organizational Learning (OLC) - now SOL – Society for Organizational Learn-ing” have been perpetuated by scientists like Carl R. Rogers, (7) Ed Schein, (8) Erving Goffman, (9) David Kolb (10) or Peter Senge. (11) From their point of view a shift from economical organisations to school organisations was not a huge step, but it took a long time, until theses ideas reached the entrance gates of schools. Despite the fact that the teaching system is a major consideration in any nation’s aspirations to attain, or maintain, an educational system of high quality, namely when our knowledge-based societies are placing new demands on individuals’ abilities and skills, the efforts to implement potential analysis into teacher education is quite new. Universi-ties often use formal appraisal schemes, but in teacher education any kind of appraisal is in most of the European countries not on the actual agenda.

To put it to a breaking point: If teachers and their teaching constitutes the core of the educational system by sharpening the fact, that their performance (12) has a large impact on student performance the question must be allowed if “anyone” can teach or not. It is therefore entirely appropriate for education authorities, policy makers, administrators, and practitioners alike to consider appraisals in early teacher education on the background of potential analysis – not for selection - very seriously. Current thinking in the area of teacher professional development has begun to recognize the importance of individual, tacit belief systems, the shape of personality and the influence, these factors have in the way a person learns to teach, how he teaches his students and how he reacts in difficult situations in his class room. This creates a much wider horizon then just asking, if a teacher is good in his subject.

OECD and the function of teachers

The critical role that teachers play is reflected in a wide variety of OECD activities in recent years. (13) In addition, OECD took major efforts to build a comparative data base on teachers,(14) the Education Committee completed two relevant documents (15) and CERI has been investigating related issues in its programme (16). The Education Ministers placed great importance on teachers  in their April 2001 Communiqué (17) but their main interest focuses more or less in the fields of lifelong learning, possible shortage of teacher supply in subjects or early language learning. Teacher students, who may be not sure, if they should enter the teaching profession or not, do not play a major role in these surveys . On the other side the suitability for the professional role of the teacher is an urgent question in many ways: the reasons,why young people want to become a teacher or the question of matching the own learning biography and the attitudes towards teaching to the needed requirements of the school organisation arises for every teacher student education some more painful questions: Shall I be a “good” teacher? Can and how do I become a “good” teacher? What kind of potential should I have or have I developed before finally entering this profession?

On the other side of the market place, schools ask: How do you get “high quality” teachers? What kind of competence setting must a “high quality” teacher de-velop during his teacher education and training? It is noteworthy, that in some European States like Germany a teacher as a state employee is - after entering the profession - up to 35 or more years in the same job. It is easy to understand, that the decision of a young man or women, to become a teacher, is a real challenge, more or less a “life” decision. But who knows, how heartily committed to teaching is someone after 20 or 30 years of teaching? And furthermore: Does the educational environment either support or block the development of the potentials for high quality teaching? But there are still more major implications, that influence this decision. To give an example: How far schools are able to transform and to adapt to the pressing societal needs will hinge to a large extent on the availability and effectiveness of the teaching workforce. It is the case that in a great number of countries the age profile of teachers is skewed towards the older end of the age-range and signs point to a recent worsening of the situation. A teaching environment, that is near the state of “burn out” is not an ideal platform for potential analysis to enter the profession. In addition, the relative attractiveness of the profession, as far as the salary dimension is concerned, has declined substantially in a number of countries in recent years. Other evidence indicates that, at least in some countries, a substantial share of the teaching workforce does not even hold a regular teaching qualification, and the proportion of “out-of-field” teaching assignments is strikingly high in some key subject areas. While many institutions in the field are rather concerned about “objective” needs like making teaching more attractive as a profession for both present and future teachers or gain a better understanding of the range of factors that affect the attraction, recruitment, development and retention of effective teachers, we should not forget the “subjective” factors of future teachers – e. g. their performance level, their communication skills, their attitudes towards teaching, their value system, their commitment to students, parents, peers etc. To answer some of these question concerning the teaching person a shift from “implicit” estimations to “explicitly” observable behaviours, a dive into the person, who teaches, seems to be necessary. This is the background of the APT – Appraisal of potential for teaching approach.

Appraisal of potential for teaching (APT) project

The Comenius 2. 1. APT- project 2003 – 2007 aims to support the training of student teachers by developing together with seven European teacher training (18)  institutions diagnostic tools to help them to identify and explore fundamental attitudes towards the teaching profession. These instrument can hopefully provide the student teacher with the opportunity to increase self-awareness through reflection and critical questioning as a starting point for further professional development as a “change agent” in school. Exercises and activities are to be used with student teachers during short-term intensive training programmes. The student teachers are observed during the activities (individual and group activities) and detailed feedback is recorded and given to them by the observers. The proposal is simultaneously addressing the needs of two target groups: namely, teacher educators and student teachers. The so-called ‘process learning’ central to the work they will undertake by using this instrument, has effects for both groups. If teacher educators know, where the learning fields of their teacher students lay, they can change the curriculum and offer individualized training units to bring out the potentials of the person in a holistic sense. This approach can also create a ‘learning organization’ in a true sense, because the work involved implies reflection and change to be implemented by both sides of the teaching and learning dynamic. The impact of the project is to provide student teachers with a deeper understanding of their personal motivations entering the profession and with insights into the aspects of teacher competence that lie beyond knowledge of one’s subject. In addition to highlighting the multi-faceted nature of the teaching profession, the diagnostic tools used assists teacher educators in distinguishing the different skills and competencies on the part of the student teachers with whom they work. It can provide them with an more objective, professional diagnosis of the student teacher’s present potential and by extension will point the student to-wards finding solutions to identified learning field, before they enter the complex profession. The project tends also to gain a wider impact at a European level. As it is practical in application it tries to initiate and develop the expertise of teacher trainers in Europe. In so doing it could bring about a network of professional skill in Europe making way for the exchange of ideas and ultimately trans-national mobility on the part of student teachers and teacher educators. The aim of deepening a mutual understanding of the wider European teacher training environment could lead to a scenario, where agreed European profiles of identifiable attitudes for teaching are available. These envisaged outputs of diagnostic tools or instruments for the use with student teachers for the purpose of identifying and exploring attitudes to teaching profession can ensure appropriate changes which occur and are needed for professional development of the teaching profession. One can also argue, that all these efforts are not necessary: Good teachers are good teachers by nature, not by nurture. But this is rather a “banalisis” (instead of an analysis), and people with a certain knowledge of the European Commission know, that they would not support a project, that tax payers costs around 600.00€ for three years.

Kurt Lewins field theory – an old, but quite modern way of identifying problems

The theoretical background of the project dates back to the field theory of Kurt Lewin. Here we will not enter into the detail of Kurt Lewin’s field theory (19) (it is beyond our remit). However, it is necessary to note its key elements. To begin it is important to recognize its roots in Gestalt theory. (A gestalt is a coherent whole. It has its own laws, and is a construct of the individual mind rather than ‘reality’- the modern constructivism has exactly docked on here). For Kurt Lewin behaviour was determined by totality of an individual’s situation. In his field theory, a ‘field’ is defined as ‘the totality of coexisting facts which are conceived of as mutually interdependent’ Individuals were seen to behave differently according to the way in which tensions between perceptions of the self and of the environment were worked through. The whole psychological field, or ‘life space’, within which people acted had to be viewed, in order to understand behaviour. Within this individuals and groups could be seen in topological terms (using map-like rep-resentations). Individuals participate in a series of life spaces (such as the family, work, school and church), and these were constructed under the influence of various force vectors. Behaviour is a function of the field that exists at the time the behaviour occurs, analysis begins with the situation as a whole from which are differentiated the component parts, and especially Kurt Lewin also looked to the power of underlying forces (e. g. needs) to determine behaviour and, hence, expressed a preference for psychological as opposed to physical or physiological descriptions of the field. In this we can see how Kurt Lewin drew together insights from topology (e.g. life space), psychology (need, aspiration etc.), and sociology (e.g. force fields – motives clearly being dependent on group pressures). As Gordon W. Allport (20) puts it, these three aspects of his thought were not separable. ‘All of his concepts, whatever root-metaphor they employ, comprise a single well-integrated system’. Lewins task oriented workshops date back to the summer of 1946, when he along with colleagues and associates from the Research Center for Group Dynamics (Ronald Lippitt, Leland Bradford and Kenneth Benne) became involved in leadership and group dynamics training for the Connecticut State Interracial Commission. They designed and implemented programmes that looked to encourage group discussion and decision-making, the trainers and researchers collected detailed observations and recordings of group activities (and worked on these during the event).

It was this, in significant parts, which gave his ideas its peculiar power. Knowing, that there is no hope for teacher Trainers to change the underlying bigger social structures as well as we know, that we can hardly influence mental models, beliefs or attitudes, the project chose the only pos-sible exit of this antinomy: Observe task oriented behaviour by using face to face structures. In a clear distinction to assessment centres, where the selection of applicants is dominant, we relied rather on building up a certain kind of feedback culture, to which the concrete person can rely too.

Figure 1: The APT Approach using Lewin´s field theory

On the other side, using Lewins model, practitioners working in the present teacher education systems know, that in most countries there is an impact of State policy on entrance into the teaching profession, which cannot be changed by educationists. We had to find the “place” of teacher Training Colleges in the teacher supply pipeline, where could possibly interfere with theses tools. The model of Goertz et. al. shows very clearly, where we can throw our anchor. (21) 

Figure 2: Goertz et al . Policy model of the teacher supply line.

Teacher trainers have a lot of influence on future teacher students in the entry and the training parts. They can interfere with policies effecting the teacher education curricu-lum and can decide, who finishes teacher education via examinations. It was clear, that after pipe three there is a magic border, which no teacher training institute can cross without political implications. But somewhere between the first three pipes we could try to install any kind of potential analysis, because some kind of behaviour can be made observable in all three pipes. Furthermore in or between all three pipes some unknown potential elements of a “teacher per-sonality” are likely to occur and could be indicated at a certain point of his professional development.

What kind of level of appraisal can we choose?

The next question was the construction of the diagnostic tools: How deep can we, should we, must we dive into someone’s personality, to give him clear feedbacks on his strengths and learn-ing fields. Here we adopted the Water-lily model because before the construction of tools the constructor must be quite sure, what level of “deep down” he can approach. 

Figure 3:  Ed Schein´s waterlily model of potential analysis

 The model is based on a model of Ed Schein. (22)

Abb. 4:  The origin of the water lily model from Edgar Schein

He argues, that organizations and cultures have a lot to do with each other. He defines three level of cultures, which are important for organizations and possible changes in them:

  • Artifacts (visible organisation structures and processes, which are hard to decipher)
  • Espoused values (strategies, goals, philosophies – espoused juistifications)
  • Basic underlying Assumptions (unconscious, taken for granted beliefs, perceptions, thoughts, feelings – ultimate source of values and action).

Our own model fits into Schein´s differentiation between different levels of self shaping in cul-tural environments. The assumption is, that any interaction between persons also is multifunc-tional, based on a set of different levels of understanding patterns like knowledge, self-image, traits and motive. A waterline defines the border between “artifacts” (what the other person should see) and “facts” or assumptions lying underneath the waterline. The picture of the waterlily (you could also take the model of an iceberg) shows the lovely flowers, but its roots are deep down in the water. By starting a appraisal of potential analysis with a person, the appraiser must be constantly alert for changes in mood or feeling on the part of the appraisee, being espe-cially sensitive to issues that may be threatening to the appraisee leading to a shutting down of the flow of information and interaction. The goal should be, to create an interaction that will provide information to the appraiser, begin to build trust so that potentials become visible. Any kind of mistrust against the appraiser leads to the point, that the appraisee automatically turns to a reaction, where his potentials become less visible or even invisible. Ed Schein quotes about his process: “The goal should be to create an interaction that will provide information to the change agent, begin to build trust with the potential change target, and begin to get the change target to think diagnostically and positively about the change project such that he or she will welcome another interview or interaction because their curiosity or their own energy for change has been aroused. In a sense the concept of "change target" has to become transformed in the change agent's mind into a "client" who seeks some help or into a "learner." The change agent has to become a facilitator of the learning process and the desired change has to be embedded in a "helping process" that makes sense to the learner”. (23)

Matching personal aptitudes to organizational requirements

We have to be aware, that  this process is from the point of cognition and social reality formation a slow moving train, like C. O. Scharmer expresses very clearly in his model: To come from “downloading”  (patterns of the past) ” to “seeing with fresh eyes” and  “sensing from the field” means a deep dive a person has to undergo. The appraisal of potential process is located somewhere in between of “seeing it with fresh eyes” and “sensing from the field – letting go” to become aware of his/per potentials and learning fields. Scharmers next steps: “presencing” would mean, to connect the findings of APT to the own personal sources (Who is myself? What is my work? – this is what we do in the feedback talks), and finally reach a certain level of “performing” – achieve results through practice and infrastructure in the classroom.(24) 

Scharmers Model of Inflection points of cognition and social realityFigure 4:  Scharmers Model of Inflection points of cognition and social reality

If we take Lewins “field theory” as a platform, an appraisal of potential for teaching process cannot be started without some basic assumptions about the matching of personal aptitudes to organizational requirements. But again, most of these assumptions are presumptions: People, who want to enter the teaching profession have implicit mental models (or assumed potentials, what teaching is all alike) – school organizations (e. g. Examination Boards, recruiting headmas-ters) also have assumed criteria of qualifications needed, of teaching standards, of desired be-haviours etc. – the latter, due to the recruitment process can make them much more explicit than the applicant can. The potential analysis has to deal with this two different sets of spoken or unspoken requirements of the school organization and spoken or unspoken self profiles of the applicant. But when it comes to the direct recruitment decision (or not), it is far too late for both sides, to balance qualification needs with the personal achievements of the candidate (see pipe 4 figure 2).

The earlier, the matching between requirements of the organization and the person starts, the better are the possibilities, to identify the potentials for teaching, to find out about the persons future learning fields and strengths and the earlier one can develop individualized learn-ing strategies or offers from the teacher training institutions for the future teacher. But this is more than an easy saying: There is a widespread discussion about the changes of the roles of teachers. The range of tasks teachers are seen as responsible for has widened significantly. What are the new job profiles or definitions of core responsibilities, that reflect the new “enriched” but also more demanding profession of teaching? To some old roles, a whole cohort of new responsibility must be added today, e. g. teaching in multi-cultural classrooms; developing civic and social skills; integrating students with special needs; providing professional advice to par-ents; working and planning in teams; being part of a learning community (within the school and/or in a network of teachers); evaluation and systematic improvement planning; management and shared leadership. 

It took us a long time in all the APT partner countries, to get on a com-mon platform, what kind of profile or parts of personal performance a European teacher needs today. Our “Granada Agreement” (named after the APT meeting there in 2004) is a provisional approach, to come to a certain kind of observable core competences, which we underpinned our diagnostic tools. Among these are:

  1. Self organization/self responsibility
  2. Role clarification
  3. Specific competences for the teaching profession
  4. Performance attitudes
  5. Leadership
  6. Role model function
  7. Strategic thinking and acting

Developing diagnostic tools for potential analysis

APT Matching modelFigure 5:  APT Matching model

It would take much to far, to present in this paper the whole range of diagnostic tools, the seven European teacher Training Institutions have developed so far. One example should be enough, to shed a small light on our approach. In Germany the teacher training College Offenburg has developed so far four different types of tools, which come into action as voluntary offer, when in each course around 130 teacher trainees start their final probationary training period of 18 month before entering the teaching profession. The first tool is a standardized entrance interview I and II , where we have constructed a set of questions, who deal with knowledge, skills and abilities, the teacher trainees think, they have learned during their university studies. En-trance interview II one year later should demonstrate a learning process via a curve line, when we confront the answers from Entrance Interview I with Entrance Interview II. We realized very soon, that this instrument has some weak points. Many trainees answered the questions in a way, they understood them, which was sometimes quite far from what we wanted to know. Experi-ences with Project work has for example nowadays a very wide range and is often far from Dewey and Kilpatricks Project Work at the Chicago Laboratory School. The second tool was developed to erase these weak point by a personal face to face – interview in the sense of Lew-in. With the help of a question sheet, in a face to face – situation, we ask the trainees about their school career , learning biography, visions and missions, etc. The answers are written down by the interviewer, signed by the interviewee and then taken to his own portfolio. This instrument was a half success – a lot of trainees appreciated the personal contact – the others were a bit frightened about their mental model of a cross examination (we had explained very often, that the latter was not our intention, but some kept a certain mistrust, and answered very vage.

The third instrument is the APT workshop, which is still on a voluntary basis. For one and a half day (mostly Friday afternoons and Saturdays a group of six teacher trainees is guided to a backstage room, where a backstage persons cares for them. The trainees get exercises, which they can pre-pare in a certain amount of time and then present the results in another room to six observers, they do not know. The observers are specially trained for their observation, especially about the distinction between „observing“ and „judging“ and the technique of “observing” and writing down (in the same moment – which is not as easy as it looks like) The three or four exercises range from single work (e.g. present for 5 minutes yourself to your new teacher colleagues) partner work (e. g. present to the department your plans for an outdoor stay of 5 days) and group work (e. g. plan and present to your colleagues your ides for a day of open doors of your school for parents and the local community). The exercises are watched by the observers in their preparation and their presentation and are always taken out of the future working field, typical teacher school tasks. After these exercises, the appraisees can give a feedback how they felt doing the exercises and then they leave with a date arranged (mostly some days later).for the individual feedback The real work then starts for the observers group. The following session of the observers group has three main topics: a)Flashlight about the person (out of the stomach) b)her/his strengths c)her/his learning fields Only b) and c) are later reported to the person as the statement of the observer group

Figure 6: Diagnostic tools from Offenburg in 2005

All observed aspects are only laid down, if each observer agrees. One observer later must give feedback to the appraisee on the groups „observed common ground“ with details, written down while he/she was exercising. The appraisee has the opportunity, to add his view to the laid down aspects. The closing procedure is the destruction of all used materials. All three tools are constantly evaluated, shortly before using them, shortly after the experiment and in a long range, one year after . The evaluation shows some remarkable results. A vast majority of trainees es-pecially rank tool three very high, they are surprised about the outcomes of the observations on strengths and learning fields. On the other side, there is a clear borderline, which trainees do not want to be crossed: the use of the outcomes for assessments or examinations. They insist on a secured environment, in which they can decide, if, or how they use the results for their own reasons. A more pressurizing approach (in the sense of using the results for clearly outspoken offers, to improve the named learning fields) would clearly destroy the atmosphere of trust and the line of “support” we offer.


Findings from the OECD Project Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers, 2004- 2005 (with 25 countries participating and 10 countries visited by review teams) indicate that three broad conclusions emerge from research on student teacher learning (25):

1. Largest source of variation in student learning is attributable to differences in what students bring to school – their abilities and attitudes, and family and community background. Of those variables which are potentially open to policy influence, factors to do with teachers and teaching are the most important influences on student learning. It is difficult to predict who is going to be a good teacher just by considering the more measurable characteristics of teachers (e.g. qualifi-cations, teaching experience, and indicators of academic ability and subject-matter knowledge). The report declares clearly Policy priorities:

  • Developing teachers‘ knowledge and skills;
  • Developing teacher profiles: Clear and concise standards of what teachers are expected to know and be able to do;
  • Reflect broad range of competencies;
  • Provide framework to guide and integrate initial teacher education, certification, induction and on-going professional development;
  • the framework should be evidence-based and reflect student learning objectives and should be built on active involvement by teaching profession.

These priorities are not quite new – a lot of work is already on its way in these areas. What was new for us was the last named priority:

  • Broadening the criteria for teacher selection: The selection criteria for new teachers need to be broadened to ensure that the applicants with the greatest potential are identified.
  • Teacher appraisal to occur within a framework provided by profession-wide agreed statements of standards of professional performance.

Potential analysis is one way, to identify the potential for teaching. We all know, that potential is not an objective and measurable term. Able teachers are not necessarily going to reach their full potential in settings that do not provide appropriate support or sufficient challenge and reward. Without a stimulating work environment, without a school management and leadership who show no interest or critical friendship in valuing and supporting teachers even the most potential teacher trainees will face after a certain period of time, that their potentials are not used. The water lily model shows, what happens then, especially in education system like Germany, where teachers are lifelong tied up to their profession: teachers show some “artefacts” of teaching, but their potential forms part of an inner emigration and is used for other purposes than teaching. The victims then are clearly the children, who need the highest quality teaching – for our and their future. To bring potential analysis into the education system is a small step forward, as Johann Wolfgang von Goethe quoted: Die Menschen scherzen und bangen sich an den Lebensrätseln herum, wenige kümmern sich um die auflösenden Worte.(26)


[1]  Prague Castle 
[2]  Sennett, R. (2005): Die Kultur des neuen Kapitalismus, Berlin, p. 88-103 
[3]  Lewin, K. (1935) A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[4]  Horkheimer, M./Adorno, Th. (1950): the Authoritarian Character, New York, republished in german 1968
[5]  Bettelheim, B. (1943) "Individual and Mass Behavior in Extreme Situations," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 38, 417-452. 
[6]  Dewey, J: Democracy and Education, first published 1916, in Germany published 1930, then blotted out until 1993 (!)  when Jürgen Oelkers republished it in german. Oelkers, J:  (1993) Demokratie und Erziehung. Eine Einleitung in die philosophische Pädagogik, Weinheim und Basel. Beltz Verlag
[7]  One of the earliest works about the issue is: The concept of the fully functioning person, in: Psychotherapy: theory, research and Practice, 1963, No. 1, S. 17-26 
[8]  Schein, E. (1995): Kurt Lewin's Change Theory in the Field and in the Classroom: Notes Toward a Model of Managed Learning', Systems Practice. also:'s_change_theory_page7.htm 
[9]  Goffman, E.: Face Engagements (in: Goffman E., Behavior in Public Places. Free Press, New York 1963: 83-111). 
[10]  Kolb, D. A. (1984) Experiential Learning, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Prentice Hall. 
[11]  Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline. N.Y.: Doubleday, 1990.
[12]  In recent work, Rivkin, Hanushek, and Kain (2000) conclude that teacher quality is the most important within-school factor explaining student performance. See: Rivkin, Steven G., Eric A. Hanushek, and John F. Kain, 2000, Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement, Working Paper 6691 (revised), National Bureau of Economic Research, Massachusetts. 
[13]  including The Teacher Today (OECD, 1990), High Quality Education and Training for All (OECD, 1992), Quality in Teaching (OECD, 1994), Staying Ahead: In-service Training and Teacher Professional Development (OECD, 1998), and Teachers for Tomorrow’s Schools (OECD & UNESCO, 2001). 
[14]  Education at a Glance (OECD, 2001a) 
[15]  Lifelong Learning for Teachers and Teacher Demand and Supply. 
[16]  Schooling for Tomorrow (OECD, 2000, 2001b, 2001c, 2001d, 2001e). 
[17]  Investing in Competencies for All.
[18]  Estionia (Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool); Sweden (Luleå tekniska universitet), Spain (Facultad de Ciencias de la education – Universidad de Granada); UK (Edge Hill College of Higher  Education, Ormskirk Lancashire); Belgium (Provinciale Hogeschool Limburg); National University Maynooth (Ireland) and as coordinating unit Germany (Staatliches Seminar für Leh-rerbildung und Didaktik Offenburg) 
[19]  Lewin (1951):  Field theory in social science (selected theoretical papers). New York ,  240.
[20]  in his foreword to Lewin (1948): Resolving Social Conflict - selected papers on group dynamics, ix), New York 
[21]  Goertz, Margaret E., Ruth B. Ekstrom, and Richard J. Caley (1984):  The Impact of State Policy on entrance into the teaching profession, NIoE, Princeton, N. Y. 
[22]  Schein, E. : (2004):  Organizational Culture and Leadership, 4th edition (e-book); 
[23]  Schein, E. (1996): Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd edition (1996) San Francisco,  134 
[24]  see homepage C.O. Scharmer: 
[25]  Chapter 5, see: 
[26]  Goethe, An Schiller, 12.7.1801; people make jokes and discuss the riddles of life, only a few care for the suspending words.