Teacher Educator Identity as a Relational Ontology: An Inquiry of the Entangled Self

Abstract

The purpose of this inquiry was to explore teacher educator identity as a relational ontology. The study is conceptually grounded in new materialism and employed self-study methodology to analyze the ways teacher educator identity was produced and enacted in relation to materiality. Findings suggest the entanglement with the internet and digital connectivity, a dependency upon things, and the consumption of things as elements of teacher educator identity. Recommendations for teaching practice and research are provided.

Keywords:

• teacher educator identity
• new materialism
• self-study
• teacher education
• materiality

Globally, the work of teacher educators centers pedagogy and scholarship to prepare education practitioners across all phases of the professional continuum. Much of this work focuses on supporting students’ abilities to reach their full academic potential (Sleeter & Carmona, 2017), develop socio-emotional competencies (Hansen, 2019), gain the skills for future engagement in the workforce (Oakes et al., 2018), and contribute to society as informed citizens (Ayers et al., 2017). Whether part of teacher preparation or professional development programs, teacher educators’ work exerts a shaping effect upon students’ academic experiences and the livelihoods of school professionals (Florian & Pantić, 2017; Kumashiro, 2015). Clearly this work is complex, and irrespective of locality or national setting, teacher educators must possess specialized knowledge and skills to meet the educational demands in the socio-cultural and political contexts of the present moment (Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2016).

This specialized knowledge largely stems from the teacher education scholarly literature and the broader literature on education, teaching, and learning. For teacher educators, the scholarship informs how they navigate the tensions inherent in their practices (Klein & Taylor, 2023; Taylor et al., 2014) and is critical in the work of curriculum development and program design, pedagogical enactment, and the myriad other tasks part of their professional responsibilities (Ananin & Lovakov, 2022; Loughran, 2007). It has informed and advanced not only the field and practice of teacher education, but also the recognition of what it means to be a teacher educator, or teacher educator identity.

Despite the efficacy of this scholarship, research about teacher educators themselves and their practices predominantly centers the human (i.e. the teacher educator, students, colleagues). Less attention has been given to materiality in the form of the non-human (e.g. objects, animals, plant life) and the more-than-human (e.g. digital devices and apparatuses) (Fox & Alldred, 2022). Presently, educational research attentive to materiality is nascent (e.g. Martin, 2019a); it is virtually untheorized in conceptualizations of teacher educator identity.

Researchers who have inquired into teacher educator identity have found this to be a generative topic. Despite the multiple definitions and epistemological stances that contour the parameters of what it is and what it means (Hamilton et al., 2016), identity can be understood as “being recognized as a certain kind of person” (Gee, 2000, p. 99). Conceptually and pragmatically, identity enables the recognition of social status and positioning, distinguishes the self from others, and enables group or community membership (Martin, 2019b). Teacher educator identity not only involves the recognition of this role, but the multiple elements and shaping influences that inform the embodiment and enactment of being a teacher of teachers. The international literature on teacher educator identity showcases the breadth and scope of inquiries in this area as not only supporting professional insight about teacher educators, but also the learning of teacher candidates and inservice teachers (Erickson et al., 2011; Izadinia, 2014).

Research studies by teacher educators investigating their teacher educator identities demonstrate the affordances in this line of inquiry (e.g. Martin & Spencer, 2020a; Pinnegar et al., 2020; Rice, 2011; Samaras, 2004). Erickson and colleague’s (2011) posit that teacher educator identity can be framed as emergent from: a) identity as a person; b) through positioning of self and others; c) as teacher educators enact their roles; and d) within a teacher educator collective. Framing teacher educator identity in this way highlights the saliency of investigating the self in relation to one’s personal and professional history, pedagogical and scholarly endeavors, and group membership. Yet such a lens fails to include the role of materiality as a shaping element in teacher educator identity.

Slife’s (2004) notion of a relational ontology offers a conceptual positioning of identity as “a distinct nexus of relationships rather than a distinct set of beliefs and values” (p. 167) and that “Things are not first self-contained entities and then interactive. Each thing, including each person, is first and always a nexus of relations” (p. 159). As such, materiality is part of this nexus. Addressing the issue of a relational ontology in the exploration of professional self, Pinnegar et al. (2020) argued that, “we seek to develop an understanding of practice from and through our own particularities” (p. 27). Teacher educator identity as a relational ontology facilitates the examination of such particularities by including materiality as a constitutive element. Given the increasing integration of technological apparatus in teacher education (Garbett & Ovens, 2017) and the shifting dynamics in how teacher education is enacted (particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic) (Moorhouse & Tiet, 2021), it is of global interest to more fully understand how materiality, particularly the non-human and more-than-human, relate to teacher educator identity.

The purpose of this inquiry was to explore my teacher educator identity as a relational ontology with attention to materiality. I am a teacher educator in an urban higher education institution in the Northeastern United States. My teaching practice and my research are informed by my positionality and a commitment to equity and social justice. I employed self-study methodology (Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009) to conduct this research. Specifically, I sought to gain insight into the role of materiality (both the non-human and more-than-human) and how these contributed to being a teacher educator. As a self-study oriented to improve pedagogical practice (Loughran, 2007), the research was guided by the question: In what ways does materiality contribute to an understanding of self as a teacher educator? The following section discusses the conceptual framework, followed by the methodology and findings. Subsequently, the discussion section offers recommendations based off this work and the conclusion presents future possibilities for inquiry and professional practice.

Conceptual Framework

This self-study was conceptually informed by new materialism, a body of concepts and theories that position the human as interconnected with materiality itself (Braidotti, 2013; Clough, 2004). New materialism attends to matter and its liveliness (Bennett, 2010). It eschews taken-for-granted boundaries between the animate and inanimate and considers how materiality acts, interacts, intra-acts (i.e. the emergence of ontological status from the joining of disparate elements), and exudes affects (Coole & Frost, 2010; Fox & Alldred, 2015; Taylor & Ivinson, 2013). Matter, which is typically relegated as passive and inert (e.g. objects) is theorized as active and affective. This framework supports the investigation of teacher educator identity as a relational ontology in that it centers the non-human and more-than-human as integral elements. New materialism does not ignore or deny human agency or action; rather, it positions these as entangled with the agency and affective properties of other forms of materiality. Adopting a new materialist lens requires one to contemplate the function of objects and things and consider how these are entangled with humans (Bennett, 2010). In this inquiry, this lens was used to explore how materiality co-conspires to produce teacher educator identity. While new materialist concepts are emergent in social science research, attending to the agency of materiality has been integral in indigenous cultures and worldviews for millennia (Rosiek et al., 2020).

A new materialist lens veers away from linear models of phenomena, or simple and direct causality. Researchers employing new materialism situate their analysis from a complex perspective focused on capturing the interdependencies, inter/intra-actions, affective responses, and particularities/singularities of an event (Frost, 2011). Such an analytic orientation elicits a need for humility on the part of the researcher, acknowledging the limitations of knowing and thinking with/through diverse forms of matter (Bennett, 2010). The recognition of the limitations of what can be known in relation to the specified nexus of thought from which a research endeavor is produced centers the partiality of any account and the need for researcher transparency (Martin & Kamberelis, 2013).

Certainly, teacher educator identity as a relational ontology aligns with new materialism’s precepts. A relational ontology is composed of multiple animate, inanimate, human, non-­human, and more-than-human elements. Teacher educator identity is an assemblage of many elements that function to produce a socially recognizable role (i.e. teacher educator). By leveling the agency and affective capacities of diverse forms of matter, a conceptual entry point is enabled to think through and inquire with materiality beyond the human (Fox & Alldred, 2015).

Methodology

LaBoskey’s (2004) guiding principles for self-study research methodologically anchored this inquiry. The work was: (a) self-initiated and focused; (b) improvement aimed; (c) interactive; (d) drew from multiple qualitative methods; and (e) demonstrates trustworthiness. Given the focus on materiality as an aspect of a relational ontology, I turned to Hodder’s (2012) notion of the tanglegram to help inform my procedures and analysis. Hodder’s tanglegram sheds light on the entanglement between humans and things and the ways humans depend on things, things depend on humans, and things depend on other things. Thus, the approach aligns with the new materialist framework for this inquiry by attuning to the agency of matter beyond the human. Additionally, I turned to self-study literature on teacher educator identity (e.g. Martin, 2018; Martin & Kitchen, 2020; Martin & Mills, 2022; Pinnegar et al., 2020) to help inform my meaning-making throughout the research process. An aim of this research is to better support teacher educators, and to encourage others to investigate their professional identities attentive to materiality.

Figure 1. Teacher educator identity tanglegram.

Context and Participants

My inquiry was conducted at a public urban institution of higher education in the Northeastern United States. As a lifelong education practitioner in urban settings, I was familiar with the geographic, political, and cultural context of the institution. I identify as a Latine, queer, cis-gendered, able-bodied male. I come from a socio-cultural and socio-economic background similar to many of my students. As a first-generation American, and as someone for whom English is a second language, my insight of the challenges and experiences my students confront is based not solely from knowing them or exclusively from the scholarly literature, but is rooted in my life experience.

My study drew from a social foundations course for teacher candidates that I taught in the spring 2020 semester. I selected this course as the focus of the inquiry due to the shift from in-person teaching to fully online instruction as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, this semester provided an opportunity to investigate teacher educator identity as enacted in-person and subsequently online with the same class. I acknowledge the ethical concerns relative to conducting research with one’s students, particularly given power differentials (Kitchen, 2019). To mitigate this tension, it was after course completion and the issuing of course grades that students were invited to participate in the study. One student in this class agreed to participate and signed a participant consent form. Sergio (a pseudonym) was an undergraduate art teacher candidate. Sergio self-identified as a Hispanic male. Originally from Puerto Rico, Sergio immigrated to the United States as a child and attended local public schools. English was a second language for him, and his experiences as a student were in urban schools. Sergio was working to complete his undergraduate degree and earn his initial teacher certification.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data collection occurred during and after the semester. During the semester collected data sources were a researcher journal (17 entries) that documented the course along with reflections on my teaching and the learning experiences, the course syllabus, and 51 notes/analytic memos (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). I also took 10 photos and five videos of my walks throughout the institutional setting. These served as a non-discursive means to document the materiality of the context I encountered in relation to my work as a teacher educator. After course conclusion, I collected Sergio’s completed coursework, which included four journal entries, an autobiography of his experiences in schools and his reflections on teaching. I also conducted and transcribed a one hour-long audio recorded interview with Sergio. The interview focused on his experiences in the class, his understanding of teaching and learning, and his reflections on his future work as an educator. All data sources were digitally housed in a password-­protected online folder.

I commenced data analysis by recursively investigating the researcher journal, syllabus, notes/analytic memos, photos, and videos. I maintained the research question as a guiding prompt and remained attentive to the use/employment of material resources including non-­human (e.g. books) and more-than-human (e.g. computers, iPhone) that were relevant to my professional practice as a teacher educator. As I reviewed the data sources I engaged in the process of open and axial coding (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). I reread each data source and identified and labeled passages, phrases, and excerpts of relevance to the research purpose. My process enabled me to begin to discern emergent themes. I reviewed these emergent themes across these data sources and sought to identify potential relationships between and among them. I examined the insights that surfaced from this process and commenced drafting a tanglegram as a visual diagram. The tanglegram provided an illustration of the multiple material resources that informed my teacher educator identity and professional practice. Arrows indicate dependence (e.g. plants need water). One-way arrows indicate one element’s dependence on another, while two-way arrows reflect mutual dependence. Nodes involving human dependence are rectangular, while those not as dependent are circular (Figure 1).

I continued to record my meaning-making in my researcher journal as I followed various “paths” in the tanglegram and assessed these in relation to the emergent themes. I then turned to the data sources provided by Sergio and continued the process of open and axial coding. My analysis enabled data triangulation (Denzin, 2009) as I was able to place the emergent themes alongside those that surfaced from Sergio’s data. Furthermore, the inclusion of Sergio’s data supported the interactive dimension of this self-study (LaBoskey, 2004) and the trustworthiness of the analysis (Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009) as it extended beyond my documentation and meaning-making of the course experience. After this process I engaged in member-checking (Merriam, 2009) with Sergio which pushed my thinking to consider absences and lack of connections in the tanglegram as well as areas with concentrated connections. Additionally, I also conferred with a critical friend (Schuck & Russell, 2005) familiar with self-study methodology and with whom I have worked with in the past. The dialogue and conversations supported my meaning-making and understanding, further allowing for trustworthiness and the dissemination of results with greater confidence.

Findings

Data analysis highlighted the complexity, situatedness, and fluidity of my teacher educator identity. The focus on materiality as an agentic, active force casts light on the non-human and more-than-human as salient elements in the production of a professional self and in the enactment of this role. Notably, the transition to online learning during the time of the inquiry served as a catalyst in the deployment of this enactment. The non-human and more-than-human were integral elements in being and enacting the role of teacher educator. Nonetheless, despite the affordances of the learning management system (LMS) and other digital/technological tools that enabled the continuation of the course after the turn to fully online instruction, Sergio experienced this shift as counterproductive. Three emergent themes surfaced from this study: (a) teacher educator identity entanglement with the internet and digital connectivity; (b) dependency on the non-human and more-than-human to enact teacher educator identity; and (c) consumption of the material resources in the production of teacher educator identity.

The Entanglement with the Internet and Digital Connectivity

Analysis highlighted entanglement with the internet and digital connectivity as salient elements in my teacher educator identity. Digital and online mediums were vital to my functioning as a teacher educator. Over the course of the semester, and especially given the COVID-19 pandemic, being a teacher educator was entangled with the more-than-human medium of the internet via the use of my laptop, iPhone, and Apple Watch. These devices enabled me to continue my work, to connect with others, and to continue to provide instruction to my students. The self-study demonstrated the extent to which the online realm (e.g. email, the LMS, websites, clouds, Google Drive) was entangled with the enactment of my teacher educator identity. Entanglement with digital apparatuses produced a teacher educator self pedagogically and ontologically operative in the online space.

Being operative in the online space was evident prior to the shift to fully remote learning. Pedagogical activity, university service work, and engagement with research were entangled with digital platforms and tools. Within the classroom, I employed a laptop, digital screen, and a flash drive with PowerPoints to display during lectures and activities. Embedded within these slides were photos and videos and thus multi-media was entangled in the enactment of being a teacher educator. The digital screen at the head of the classroom displayed key content, focus questions, and prompts during lectures, whole group, small group, and individual reflection activities. I kept the time for small group discussions using the timer feature on my Apple Watch, its gentle chimes informing me when to bring group conversations to a close.

Pedagogical activities themselves were augmented by digital connectivity. For example, some activities included the use of students’ smart phones. In one instance, during a lesson about linguistically diverse classrooms, I employed the website polleverywhere.com to conduct a live poll where students distinguished between facts and myths about emergent bilingual students. By sending an SMS message, students provided a response to statements displayed on the digital screen, indicating if the statement was a fact or myth. The results were displayed instantly on the screen. As such, being a teacher educator was entangled with the internet and the digital context.

The subsequent shift to fully remote learning necessitated that all pedagogical activity be conducted through a digital and online environment. The previous entanglement of in-person instruction was put on an indefinite pause with this shift to a virtual context. My role as teacher educator was now fully enmeshed, entangled, and enacted through synchronous and asynchronous online modalities. For example, Zoom sessions replaced the in-person classes. Zoom, in effect, became the classroom, a space where I interacted with students through windows and icons. Rather than having passing conversations in hallways or in my office prior to or after class, the Zoom chat feature became a space/place to comment, respond, or provide clarity to students’ questions or comments. This fore fronted intentionality on my part; my words were no longer a passing utterance, but memorialized in the Zoom chat. Similarly, communication through email and the LMS was used to replicate what would have taken place in the in-person sessions. Advising and supporting my students, not just in reference to the specific course content, but in relation to the pathway toward teacher certification, emerged through an assemblage of emails, chat messages, Zoom advisement meetings, LMS course announcements, and shared online media.

Given this continuation of communication and my ability to respond to and interact with my students, I deemed the translation of my professional practice and teacher educator identity into the online realm as satisfactory and responsive. The multiple online tools and platforms enabled instruction and the production of my teacher educator identity. However, in contrast to this conclusion, Sergio’s reflections on the course’s online transition emphasized the absence of the socio-emotional dimensions of the learning experience. Speaking on this topic, Sergio shared the following in his interview.

I mean, online learning is somewhat difficult because I’m not fully focused and I’m not fully in tune with the energy of my professor, the energy of the students in the classroom, even though we’re talking to the laptop or whatever device you use, it’s different. Socially, you’re not able to interact face-to-face with someone and just go off of energies. I'm big on energy. And it made it difficult. Also, some people don’t have devices or laptops to do online courses. The materials become a big issue. And it’s just difficult. … So it kind of is much more limiting and narrowing in terms of the learning experience. … For me, it kind of hindered, it was difficult through the learning experience.

Sergio’s reflection did not indicate he did not learn, but rather that learning became a challenge. My focus was on imparting and facilitating the academic content I was tasked to teach and through which I connected my teacher educator identity. My focus potentially obscured my awareness of how the socio-emotional aspects of in-person instruction were translated, or outright absent, in the transition to online learning. For example, the following excerpt from a journal entry emphasized supporting students’ learning of academic content in contrast to Sergio’s emphasis on the socio-emotional aspects of instruction.

Tonight’s session went well, I think. The class session was focused on the ways that U.S. schools have traditionally sorted students. I think, that for many in this class, they themselves may have had experiences similar to what was described in the course text … There were no small groups this evening … We didn’t talk about our own experiences. I think I didn’t realize or notice it earlier. I think what I wanted for them is to get an understanding of how schools function, how kids have been grouped in schools, and how this has served to perpetuate a history of biased sorting … I was happy that the shared screen function worked, that the audio and camera functioned, and that I was able to cover the content and answer the questions they had.

While I was focused on making sure I could continue teaching through the online platform, Sergio’s responsiveness to the course and course content was mitigated by the online medium’s lack of ability to replicate the affective dimensions of an in-person learning experience. My analysis indicates a tension in the enactment of teacher educator identity and practice in the online space where communication, mediated by online tools, may be unable to provide the socio-emotional equivalent of the affective connections present during in-person instruction.

Throughout in-person and fully remote instruction, my teacher educator identity was entangled with the digital and the online as material components integral in the enactment of my professional self. Given the dire circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is unlikely that the continuation of the course in real-time could have occurred without the entanglement of a digital space like Zoom. Yet, even with the affordances of such a platform (and the real-time interactions it enabled), the qualities of the in-person class experience, as described by Sergio, were absent. Potentially, the enactment of the socio-emotional dimensions of teacher educator identity and the classroom experience are currently inaccessible with today’s digital resources.

The Dependency on Things in the Enactment of Teacher Educator Identity

My inquiry demonstrated a dependency on things in order to enact the role of teacher educator identity. Aside from the human other (e.g. students, colleagues) and the digital tools previously discussed, being a teacher educator surfaced from my reliance on things, both the non-human and more-than-human. Mundane objects, such as the messenger bag that I brought to campus, the coffee that I drank in my office, my desk, chair, the handouts I provided my students, the trees I looked at outside my office window, and the books I carried were all part of the entanglement in the production of my teacher educator self. Not all of these were as vital as others in this enactment, and I could recognize myself (and be recognized by others) in my professional endeavors without some objects (e.g. my coffee, handouts). Nonetheless, the enactment of my role highlighted these items and their vitality in the production of my teacher educator identity.

When on-campus instruction was taking place, the physical context, in conjunction with objects (digital and non-digital) enabled the production and recognition of my teacher educator identity. For example, by being in the designated classroom on particular days of the week, at a particular time, and standing at the head of the room facing those in attendance (i.e. the students), I was physically situated in a time and space that communicated my role in the course. Yet physical positioning alone was not the sole proxy for being the teacher educator. Objects informed, contributed to, and enabled me to engage in my professional tasks. The desk at the front of the class enabled me to set down my belongings. The stack of syllabi I carried into the first class session signaled I was not one of the students. The multiple hard copies of the course texts and assigned readings, as well as the flash drive that contained copies of the PowerPoints I would use signaled my teacher educator identity. Yet, beyond functioning as a means of being recognized, I was dependent on these objects to facilitate my work with my students.

My dependency on objects extended beyond the classroom itself. For example, the key I possessed allowed me to enter my private office. The pencils, pens, books, post-it notes, and other office supplies I employed allowed me to prepare for my class sessions, take notes on my readings, and provide feedback on submitted assignments. Being in the office during regularly scheduled office hours, sitting at the desk, and employing the multiple physical items/objects that occupied my office were additional proxies for my identity as teacher educator. Meeting with students for advisement during these times, I was drawing from and using a multiplicity of objects to conduct my work.

Certainly, the transition to full online instruction shifted the dependency from many of these things onto others. I was no longer dependent on the spatiotemporal context of the classroom or campus setting, nor was I as reliant on the tools I had used in my class sessions (e.g. chart paper, markers, handouts) to teach and produce a teacher educator self. Entanglement with the digital realm became the prime site for the enactment of my teacher educator identity. I highlighted this realization in a journal entry I wrote where I reflected on teaching online in contrast to teaching in-person earlier in the semester.

We met through Zoom tonight and I shared my screen to use the PowerPoint. We talked about school culture and how academic cultures focused on student learning can be promoted. During class it’s like everything is filtered through the screen. I couldn’t get the video to play so I emailed the students the links/urls so they could watch them on their own devices. I'm not sure how all of the classroom exercises are going to transition online. Before, if the technology wasn’t working or the internet went down I could still have a conversation with the class. If it goes down now, I can’t do anything.

While I came to recognize my dependency on things, Sergio’s perspective on the course failed to account for the role of things in his work as a teacher candidate or future self as teacher. Rather, Sergio emphasized human-to-human interactions, and how communication between individuals in an authentic context is vital for a teacher to work with their students. Reflecting this theme, Sergio wrote the following in a course journal entry.

Proper dialogue and communication also gives an instructor insight on a student’s interests, their needs and working habits. Gaining this type of information makes it easier for an instructor to build lesson plans and plan individual progress … in my opinion, it is vital that teachers build a relationship with students in order to grow and progress with the students.

Sergio’s comments highlighted that in the role of teacher candidate, his view of his future work centered upon his interactions with students and the value of these interactions as integral in meeting their learning needs. Tasks in which teachers engage, such as lesson planning or ascertaining how to assess individual students’ progress, are informed by interactions and engagement with students. Potentially, Sergio’s overlooking the role of objects and things in the work of teachers may have been due to not yet possessing actual teaching experience in a classroom.

The Consumption of Things in the Enactment of Teacher Educator Identity

My inquiry highlighted the consumption of things in the enactment of my role as a teacher educator. Attending to materiality shed light on the consumption of electricity in the use of digital devices, paper, plastic in the form of water bottles, gas in my commute to campus, and multiple other resources that were taken up, consumed, and disposed of. As previously discussed, a dependency on things informed my teacher educator identity and my ability to complete pedagogical and professional tasks. Yet beyond the point at which these material resources enabled the enactment of my professional identity, many were rendered used and failed to subsequently exert pedagogical efficacy or utility.

For instance, in a class session early in the semester involving students working in groups to visually illustrate Freire’s (1970) concepts of the “banking method,” “problem posing education,” the “oppressed,” and the “oppressor,” students discussed these and created posters to visually depict their understanding. I provided the students with chart paper, markers, and tape. As the students worked, I met with each group to discuss their meaning-making and progress. The groups taped their posters on the classroom walls and proceeded to engage in a “gallery walk.” Students walked about the classroom, viewed their peers’ posters, or stood by their posters to discuss their work. At the conclusion of the session, I took pictures of the posters students had created and shared these in the LMS. Yet the hard copies, the physical posters themselves, were disposed of in the trash receptacle, along with markers that had dried out.

Certainly, in this instance, it was a few sheets of paper and plastic markers that were consumed and discarded. These material items enabled me to facilitate the activity and informed the enactment of my professional self. Their efficacy surfaced in their ability to function pedagogically. Once the function was fulfilled (i.e. students completed their posters, viewed each other’s posters, and discussed their own work), there was no further need to keep or maintain these items. They became artifacts of my students’ learning process, of my pedagogy, and of the ways I deployed my teacher educator identity. The posters were pedagogically consumed (i.e. viewed and discussed), physically used (i.e. marked upon) and discarded.

Attending to how things are consumed in the production of teacher educator identity and its deployment amplified the role of the non-human in the enactment of teaching and in the processes of student learning. Even with the shift to fully online learning, things were still being consumed, although to a lesser extent. Paper, pencils, and other materials for classroom use were now obsolete; gas consumption for trips to campus discontinued, and even the consumption of electricity to power my computer or other digital devices on campus came to a standstill as my professional responsibilities and obligations were fulfilled from home. In my journal entry following the last class session, I reflected upon the ways that the pandemic had changed the “doing” of teacher education and the resources employed.

I've thought about how this class is going to work in the fall, but right now no one knows if (or when) we’re going back to campus and in person learning. I read earlier today that greenhouse emissions have gone down since the lockdowns. I think about how my own commutes to campus have stopped. I think about the effects of this pandemic on humanity, and now how the lockdowns and changes in human activities because of COVID are having an impact on the planet. I think about the stacks of syllabi I print and provide my students each semester. How much paper do I use? How many trees were needed for those syllabi and subsequent worksheets? I guess the trees will get a break this fall if classes are all online and pdfs will replace those hard copies.

From Sergio’s perspective, becoming a teacher and his engagement in the course more fully attended to an awareness of how a lack of physical items, things, or resources could influence or affect the learning of students, particularly those who are financially underprivileged. Whereas analysis of my teacher educator identity revealed how I was consuming things to do my work, Sergio’s emphasis was on the outcomes for students who do not have the things they need to learn, and how as a future teacher he needed to find ways to support these students. Sergio shared the following in one of his course reflections.

Within this day and age the work of an instructor far exceeds what was in the past. Teachers have to tap into multiple facets of pedagogy in order to succeed in properly instructing their students. … Teachers need to become more aware of the emotional status of a student and what factors affect the student. Factors such as one’s environment can have negative and positive effects on students. A simple thing such as not being properly fed can have a dire effect on a student. Abuse at home or outside of school is another example that affects a student in school. Socioeconomics is a part of the determining factor of how to engage a student. Low income communities have to be taken into account and properly understood. Students from low income homes may not have lots of books. They might not have enough food. They might not have a regular place to sleep at night.

Sergio’s construction of his future teacher identity attended to how a lack of things (e.g. food, books, stable housing) has dire consequences and a detrimental impact on student learning. The consumption of things and how they were being utilized in the classroom context was peripheral in his understanding about his future professional practice. Potentially, the contrasts between our positionalities as teacher educator and teacher candidate may have contributed to this differential focus.

Discussion

The aim of this inquiry was to explore teacher educator identity as a relational ontology and attend to materiality and its agentic capacities as having a shaping influence upon the production of a professional self. While the body of literature on teacher educator identity (and teacher identity) has provided evidence of the role of prior schooling experiences and professional practice (e.g. Andreasen et al., 2019), interactions with colleagues and others (e.g. Tuval et al., 2011), and socio-cultural-linguistic identities as bearing influence in this production (e.g. Martin, 2018; O’Keeffe & Skerritt, 2021), my work spotlights the function of the non-human and more-than-human. As such, this inquiry positions teacher educator identity as a material production. Materiality contributed to teacher educator identity, both during in-person and online instruction.

Previous inquiries have also attended to the longitudinal influences of a variety of human actors in relation to teacher educator identity (e.g. Martin & Spencer, 2020b; Rice et al., 2015). In contrast, my study highlights how the non-human and more-than-human material elements exerted an immediate influence upon the enactment of teacher educator identity. The entanglement with materiality, the dependency upon and the consumption of things were integrated with the human (i.e. myself, my students). Thus, teacher educator identity surfaced as emergent in diverse localities (e.g. the classroom, the faculty office, Zoom, the LMS).

As a relational ontology, teacher educator identity encompasses a wide spectrum of material elements. A new materialist perspective begins to distance the body as the primary or centered element in the production of the teacher educator self. To be sure, adopting a new materialist lens does not suggest this production in the absence of the human; it does, however, situate the body as one element among others in the constellation that is the professional self. Perhaps, given the increased reliance on the more-than-human elements (e.g. LMS, apps, digital technologies), these are becoming core elements in what it means to be a teacher educator.

Thus, there is a need for teacher educators to more consciously consider the means through which they conduct their work, the ways in which they understand themselves and their professional practice, and the implications for engaging with the material resources they take up, use, and dispose of. Additionally, my work highlights the acknowledgment of the professional self as ongoing and emergent through multiple events in diverse circumstances. Just as reflection on self and practice (e.g. Moon, 2015; Pinnegar & Hamilton, 2009) has surfaced as a meaningful and productive avenue to support teacher educator’s insight of their professional identities and work, attending to the employment and role of materiality can offer a new lens on the teacher educator self. Including materiality, particularly the digital and online resources, contextualizes dimensions of identity that are rapidly affecting how teacher educators conduct their work.

Certainly, technology, online resources and digital apparatuses are playing an increasingly integral role in teacher educators’ work. In this study, I was able to continue to enact my teacher educator identity during the transition from in-person to online/remote instruction because of the affordances the technology offered. Yet, from Sergio’s point of view the socio-emotional dimensions of the classroom experience were noticeably absent with this shift. It may be that future inquiries should consider how teacher educator identity can be enacted and translated via the online medium in ways that approximate the socio-emotional dimensions of the classroom evident during in-person instruction.

The new materialist orientation employed in my work signals an ethical responsibility on how materiality is employed and consumed. My analysis emphasizes the imperative to consider the pedagogy I enacted in my classroom, the enactment of my values in my scholarship, and to more fully attend to the impact and effect of being and enacting the role of teacher educator upon the things I use and the environment itself. The existential menace of climate change necessitates a rapid and comprehensive reorientation and response on the part of the human species given our entanglement with other life forms and materiality at large. The individual actions and instances of material consumption identified in this work demonstrate the imperative to position teacher educator identity within a broader relational nexus. A collective ethical response to the consumption of materiality (in this study, through the production of teacher educator identity) may facilitate micro-changes that can contribute to eco-social justice.

Recommendations

The findings of this inquiry demonstrate that a new materialist perspective is productive and insightful in the exploration and analysis of teacher educator identity. The investigation reported in this work took place over a semester. Future inquiries can take up the new materialist lens to explore teacher educator identity over a longer period of time and in conjunction with multiple theoretical frames. A multi-lens approach would enable researchers to further understand the role and influence of materiality in relation to the human and social positioning, identity, and power. Such work can also take up how teacher educator identity is produced alongside the professional identities of one’s students (e.g. teacher candidates, future school leaders).

My work points to the need for future research to more fully and directly address the ways in which online resources and digital technologies are transforming the work and role of teacher educators. While the literature provides multiple inquiries of how teachers adopt or utilize technology in classrooms, less is known about how teacher educators do so themselves and how this is changing the role of teacher educator. While my study attended to the more-than-human as an integral medium in the production of teacher educator identity, it did not focus on one particular platform as the primary focus. Future research can investigate how particular digital tools shape teacher educator identity and illuminate how the affordances of in-person instruction and pedagogical interactions between instructor and students (specifically the socio-emotional dimensions of such interactions) can be enabled and enacted through the online medium.

How teacher educator identity, pedagogy, and the structures of teacher education intersect with and respond to the challenges brought about by climate change needs greater attention. Pedagogically, teacher educators should more fully integrate a consideration of climate change and how the everyday actions/inactions of teachers and other school stakeholders can contribute to or work against the environmental crisis. Just as issues of social justice and equity have been woven into the fabric of teacher education programs and pedagogy (Strom & Martin, 2022; Taylor & Diamond, 2020), so too must teacher educators inform and support future teachers with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to work toward environmental justice.

Conclusion

My self-study has enabled me to better appreciate the role of digital apparatuses and the entanglement with materiality in my teacher educator identity. It has caused me to become conscious of my consumption of material resources and the need to attend to the role of materiality in my pedagogy and my work. The inquiry contributes to the broader teacher education literature, and to the self-study literature, as to how teacher educators can explore their professional identities as a relational ontology, specifically attending to the role of materiality. Thus, this inquiry serves as an empirical example of how new materialism can shed light on teacher educator identity and the enactment of a professional identity. A new materialist lens affords a theoretical guide that other teacher educators and education researchers can adopt to investigate identity beyond the limits of a human-centered framework. As such, teacher educators in diverse international contexts can explore the particular and specific elements among the human, non-human, and more-than-human that exert a shaping effect upon teacher education practices and teacher educator identity.

My inquiry also emphasizes the imperative to consider one’s role as teacher educator beyond the pedagogical, the mediums through which teacher educators enact their roles, and how these produce a shaping effect. Collectively, teacher educators can rethink the self as isolated from things, toward self, and the teacher educator self, as an entanglement inclusive of others, human, non-human, and more-than-human. It is a productive starting point for teacher educators to recognize their students as connected to and entangled not only with others, but with materiality as well. Such an orientation serves to promote ontological understandings that are inclusive and affirmative of self and other, but also of the material environment in which these identities are enacted. By honoring self, others, and the environment, we can work toward the reimagining of social and institutional contexts as characterized by environmental and social justice.