Introduction
Started in 1999, the latest reform of educational system in Poland has brought about extensive changes in all aspects of our system of education. These included structural changes in the school system, transferring the obligation to finance schools to local governments and school syllabuses and system of assessment were thoroughly modified. All these changes, the widest-ranging in the post-war history of Poland, aimed at improving the quality of education.
The reformers also provided for a change in teacher advancement procedures. They wanted the system to motivate teachers to permanently improve their professional qualifications and, in consequence, to raise the prestige and attractiveness of the profession.
Teachers reacted to the reformers’ proposals with hope for improvement of their working conditions but also with distrust towards the new procedures. One of the widely discussed issues was the newly introduced obligation to document one’s professional development; previously, only teachers at the beginning of their career were obliged to collect their lesson plans.
The reform introduced four stages of the professional advancement:
• probationary teacher,
• contract teacher,
• appointed teacher,
• certified teacher.
When starting their work in a school, a teacher enters the path of professional advancement and begins a traineeship period in order to obtain the degree of contract teacher. However, only after obtaining subsequent degrees is a teacher’s professional position guaranteed; they are then employed for an unlimited period of time and some posts in the education system (e.g. headmaster, inspector, teaching consultant) become accessible to them. Obtaining a higher step on the ladder of professional advancement is also accompanied by a pay rise. Nowaday the average salary of a teacher in traineeship is about 1100 PLN (282 €); for a contract teacher it is 120% of a traineeship teacher’s salary, for an appointed teacher – 150% of a traineeship teacher’s salary and for a certified teacher – 180% of a traineeship teacher’s salary.
During the traineeship for each level, teachers are obliged to perform various tasks which are suited to a particular stage in the development process. The degree of contract teacher is obtained after a one-year, while the other degrees – after 2 years and 9 months. At the beginning of the traineeship, a teacher prepares a plan of professional development and after that, during the traineeship period, he collects documents which confirm that the plan has been carried out. After the traineeship has ended, he/she submits a written report to his/her headmaster. The headmaster then evaluates the teacher’s achievements during the period in consultation with the Parents Council. Subsequently, at the teacher’s request, an administrative procedure is initiated.
The teacher’s achievements are evaluated by special committees. They comprise specialists in a given school subject, but also the teacher’s employers (local authorities) and representatives of the supervising bodies. The final result is based on the evaluation of the documentation submitted by the teacher and confirming that the stated requirements have been met, and on the interview with the teacher.
The documentation, gathered in a file due to its volume, has to meet the criteria specified in the Regulation of the Minister of Education and Sport. The file has to contain:
- the plan of professional development,
- progress report,
- an evaluation by the headmaster,
- documents which confirm that the tasks mentioned in the plan of development have been performed (in a written, graphic or audio-video form),
- certificates which confirm that the teacher performed functions in the system of education,
- certificates which confirm that the teacher attended courses and training sessions.
For those teachers who apply for the degree of certified teacher, it is also:
- written reports of completing selected tasks,
- descriptions and analyses of diagnosed and solved educational problems with students,
- documentation which confirms the participation in the tasks mentioned in the Regulation (e.g. preparing and implementing an educational programme, conducting open lessons, collaboration with the local community, preparing at least two publications or reports, performing the task of an examiner, etc.)
The requirements for consecutive degrees of professional advancement stipulate the increasing the teachers’ professional competence while they climb the consecutive rungs of the ladder of advancement:
- a contract teacher can correctly perform the educational tasks, taking into account the specificity of a given school,
- an appointed teachers can organize their own workspace, they can analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of their actions and correct them accordingly; they apply the latest knowledge in their work; they can apply the provisions of the law of education,
- a certified teacher takes actions aimed at improving the quality of school work and shares their knowledge and experience with other school employees, publishes and collaborates with the local community.
The reform of the system of education has also modified the possibilities of teachers’ horizontal advancement. These are realised by performing various functions in a school, e.g. head of class tutors’ group, head of a group of teachers of one subject, leader of in-school teacher training improvement. Among the complete novelties is the introduction of educational mentoring. A teacher who starts work in a school gets support from his or her mentor.
The path of professional advancement made it possible for the most active teachers to achieve the highest degree after 7 years of work in a school. Currently, the Ministry of Education has introduced compulsory breaks between achieving a degree and beginning a traineeship period for the next one. The complete advancement route can now be covered in 10 years. It is still an open question whether this has silenced the criticism which pointed out that the possibilities of professional advancement for teachers were exhausted too soon.
Currently, the largest portion of the Polish teachers is appointed teachers (60%); by virtue of the law, all the teachers who had worked in a school long enough obtained this title in 2000. However, their number is constantly decreasing while the number of certified teacher and contract teachers is increasing.
Considering the fact that the quality of education and the success of changes which are being implemented depends on the quality of teaching staff, the question is worth asking now – six years after the reform was implemented – about teachers’ opinions on the new procedures of professional advancement. The research conducted so far on the subject in Poland is still scarce.

Methodology of research and the study sample
The study was conducted as a diagnostic survey. The questionnaire was distributed proportionally among teachers working in villages, in small towns and in big cities.
Eighty-six teachers responded, including 18 school headmasters (21%). Most of the respondents were women (94%) and teachers with master degree (67%). Most of them were 31-40 years old, with 11-20 years long work experience.
More than half of the teachers worked in a primary school (in Poland these are students from 7 to 12 years old), then in a preschool (28%), junior high school (23%) and high (secondary) school (3,5%) .
Among the respondents, the largest group were appointed (60%) and certified teachers (27%); the group of school headmasters comprised only representatives of these two groups. About 44% (nearly half) were following the procedures for professional advancement.

RESULTS
The first part of the survey contained questions of opinions and attitudes towards the procedures of advancement which were implemented by the reform, and of the personal attitudes towards the necessity to follow these procedures.
The respondents were retrospectively asked to state their past attitude towards the new procedures. The largest number of the respondents (66%) felt hope for an improvement of their financial situation, increasing the professional status of teachers (42%) and their professional qualifications (248%). Many people’s attitude was negative – they were afraid that they would fail to fulfill the requirements and expectations and had been anxious about the future. The details are presented in the diagram below .











Diagram 1.

The current opinions on the professional advancement procedures and the results of their implementation show where the teachers’ hopes were fulfilled or not and where their fears and negative opinions were confirmed. The trends in the responses are not uniform, which partly results from a diversity and specificity of school environments and the respondents’ experiences. The largest number of the respondents said that the new regulations introduced unnecessary bureaucracy (71%) and burdened teachers with unnecessary work (47%). According to one-fourth of the respondents, the new procedures resulted in setting the teachers at variance. Among the most frequently mentioned advantages, improvement of in their professional qualifications (27%) and financial situations were commonly cited (21%).
Diagram 2.

Teachers were also asked in questionnaire about the comprehensibility of the procedures of professional advancement at the moment when they began the traineeship period. Although for more than half they were understandable enough, but for as many as 41% of the respondents the procedures were unclear.
The survey also contained questions concerning the problems that the respondents met during the period of traineeship. The most frequently mentioned ones concerned the collecting of documentation (37%), describing one’s work (30%) and preparing a plan of development (24%). In the group of headmasters were there three who did not complain of any problems.
According to the respondents, the major reason for initiating the professional advancement procedure was financial (nearly 2/3 of the respondents). A similar number indicated the self-fulfilment, professional ambitions and hopes for job stability (about 1/3 in each case). Interestingly, it became apparent that the group of headmasters was specific in this respect as they, more frequently than others, indicated their professional ambitions as their motive, with none of them indicating a fear of losing a job, the latter being indicated by 16% of ordinary teachers.
The respondents also indicated what motives, in their opinion, other teachers had for initiating the advancement procedure. They indicated mainly financial reasons (86%), professional ambitions and fear of losing a job (29% each).
Among the factors which respondents felt may discourage teachers from making efforts to obtain consecutive degrees on the advancement path, the main factor was having to collect huge amount of documentation (84%). Fewer respondents, which does not mean that those were incidental choices, feared that they would not find a job, being more “costly” for an employer (1/4 of the respondents), or indicated the length of the traineeship period (nearly 1/5 of the respondents). Some indicated a feeling of competition between teachers as a factor which might discourage one from initiating the advancement procedure.
Teachers were also asked directly about their opinions concerning the effect of advancement on the possibility of finding a job. According to 49% of the respondents, for those who have completed the advancement procedure it is more difficult to find a job. Some added comments, such as: “the school governing bodies expect the headmasters to employ or give extra hours of teaching to the teachers with the lowest professional status”. Only 14% felt that a teacher with a higher degree of advancement find it easier to get a job in a school.
The respondents also assessed the effect that the newly implemented procedures had on the relations between teachers. Among the 112 opinions, 55% were negative (“they set teachers at variance”, “as a result, the teachers who have obtained the higher degrees of advancement become isolated”, “as a result, the teachers who do not make any efforts to advance become isolated”), and 38% positive (“strengthening the cooperation between teachers”, “integration of the teachers’ teams”); according to 13% of the respondents, there is no such effect.

The second part of the questionnaire contained questions about the experiences of the teachers from their own advancement procedures. Most of the questions were about the effect of the efforts made in order to advance on various areas of the teachers’ lives . Firstly, the teachers assessed the effect, if any, that the advancement procedures had on their educational work. According to 58% respondents, the traineeship period did not affect their work in any way. In the opinion of 38% of them, the effect was positive, and in the opinion of 3 teachers (not headmasters) their work had deteriorated.
A question was also asked about any changes in the manner of work as a possible result of a successful outcome of the advancement procedures and of the new experiences. As many as 43% of the respondents raported that their work has not changed at all. Most of the respondents who indicate that the professional advancement brought about some changes say that as a result they better cope with the educational documentation (33%). Among other less frequently mentioned results, there was better cooperation with parents and with the local communities (13%), conducting interesting lessons (12%) and better understanding of students’ problems (12%) as well as more frequent use of computers in teaching (11%).
Diagram 3.


When the effect of the advancement procedures on the teachers’ development is evaluated by the teachers themselves, 68% of them had noticed an effect, and the remaining group of 29% thought that no such development was observed including 1/3 of them who strongly denied any effect.
The most critical opinions were expressed by teachers about the effect of the advancement procedures on their private lives. As many as 46% indicated that the traineeship period had a negative effect on their private lives, especially on their care of small children. Here is an example statement: “I found a job when I was pregnant. Now my husband is looking after my small child and I am during my traineeship period because otherwise I would lose my job and might not find another”.

The third part of the questionnaire was about the quality of work of the teachers who follow the advancement procedures.
Worrying replies were obtained to the question about the relevance of the documentation collected during the advancement procedure. As many as 56% of the respondents thought that part of the documents is absolutely based on fiction. Although the others deny the fictitious nature of su lach documents, only two teachers said “absolutely not”. Again, the headmasters’ responses stand out. Because if 2/3 of the ordinary teachers are convinced about the fictitious nature of the documents, the headmasters usually suppose that it is based on facts.


The actions taken by teachers as part of the advancement procedure are said to be “only for show” by most respondents (74%); in the next question concerning their quality, the most frequently chosen answer was “they are spectacular, but average quality” (72%). A high educational value was attributed to them only by 23% of the respondents, while according to 8% they do not have any value at all. And again – the headmasters are more optimistic in the evaluation of teachers’ actions than the other respondents.
The respondents were also asked to evaluate the quality of the courses they had to take part in order to improve their qualifications, and which appeared in great numbers with the new requirements concerning the advancement procedures. Apart from the general opinion, the question concerned the possibility to get new and relevant information, new material presented in the courses and lack of any useless content or their infantile character. The offer in terms of the courses was usually evaluated as wide but not too diverse, which resulted in a limited choice (60%); less frequently it was described as diverse (38%). The most detailed evaluations were positive, but according to 57% of respondents, the courses offer little or very little new or important material; nearly half of the respondents say that most courses present material that the participant knew from their university studies or from earlier courses; 22% of the respondents accused the course organisers of presenting infantile and more entertaining than educational contents.
In answering the general final question of the questionnaire: “Are the new procedures of teacher professional advancement an important achievement of the reform of education?”, only 26% of the respondents esteemed them highly, but only one person very highly. On the other hand, 73% gave a negative answer to the question, with 17% choosing the “absolutely not” option.

Diagram 4.


Conclusions
Most teachers who took part in the survey welcomed the new procedures of professional advancement, implemented as part of the reform of the education system in Poland, with the hope of improving their situation. A majority of them started the advancement procedure, meeting the requirements which were its inherent part and presenting their documentation before the committee. However, the opinions on the effect of the actions taken as part of the advance procedure are much less enthusiastic, although those actions were supposed to motivate teachers to develop professionally. Generally, the advancement procedure is described as existing only in documents which have to be collected by a trainee (“teachers development on paper”); it is said that the procedure is completely unnecessary in terms of a teacher’s everyday work in a school. This is what the teachers wrote about this part of the reform: “More paper, less time to be devoted to students”, “A teacher devotes less time to a child because he has to ‘produce’ documents”, “The reform has destroyed the joy of work with children”, “Because of the bureaucracy, teachers do not have time to teach”, “This is a way to get teachers to work for free”.
The respondents had a feeling that the procedures do a lot of damage to their private and professional lives (“I neglected my home and family, I neglected my professional duties”, “No time for the family, nervousness, unnecessary expenses”, “Because of having to collect the documentation, I neglected my own child”, “The reform produced unhealthy competition, working just for show, it has promoted those who speak a lot but do little”). Although in the opinion of many of them they developed and gained new experiences during the traineeship period, most of them claim that the benefit gained does not offset the cost (in terms of money, time and effort spent) because of the ostensible and superficial character of actions that they had to take. This is what they wrote: “From the current perspective, I have a feeling that teachers make clowns of themselves”, “Falseness, fiction, no authority in the evaluating committee”, “The traineeship period is a nervous period, it is a burden to feel forced to do something; it did not have anything to do with doing something for one’s development”, “A mediocre teacher can produce the best of files with documentation. The file does not reflect the teacher’s skills and abilities”.
The most unsettling conclusions concern the picture of the new advancement procedures as training in pretending to work. It is not satisfying that, according to the respondents, they have learnt to cope with official documents, as some of the documents are based on fiction. The data confirm the opinions presented in periodicals for teachers that “a lot of young teachers copy the files from their older colleagues, everyone borrows ‘case studies’ from others; when in need, one can accept an offer from the press or the Internet advertisement from people who ‘can prepare a file of documentation in three weeks’ ” .
The most worrying information for the situation in the system of education in Poland is that although part of the teachers’ hopes associated with the reform were fulfilled, this does not translate into improvement in the quality of teaching. As many as 43% of the respondents claim that obtaining the next degree of advancement did not have any effect on their work, while only 12% felt that their lessons are now more interesting and that they understand their students’ problems better – these are the areas of a teacher’s work which interest the society at large the most.
The results of the survey also revealed some interesting information about the specific character of the school headmaster group. It is difficult to draw conclusions as the sample in question was too small. However, it can be noticed that the answers given by the headmasters suggest a difference in perceiving the reform by this sub-group as compared to that of the ordinary teachers. Generally, the headmasters have a more positive attitude to the reform and to the procedures which accompany it. It was easier for them to initiate the advancement procedures, they did not have so many problems following them; they have more trust in the quality of the teachers’ actions and the documentation presented by teachers. One has to be very cautious not to jump to conclusions, but one cannot help remembering the “propaganda of success” from the previous stage in our history, when problems and difficulties were not much talked about by officials.
At the end let us quote another two comments from the teachers. One: “The advancement procedure does not show the true work of a teacher. First of all, according to the Regulation, a teacher has to document successes and their effect on improvement the work of a school and a teacher. In my opinion, it is not success that affects the quality of a school work, but failures, where everyone has to draw the relevant conclusions. Therefore, the documentation collected in the files is distorted, fragmentary, often based on fiction” and the other – shorter, but emphatic: “We are well educated, badly paid, absolutely dissatisfied!”.
The new procedures of teachers’ professional advancement, implemented as part of the reform of the system of education in Poland, were intended as help to the teachers themselves, whose situation in terms of their salaries and social prestige was not too good, and to students (and, in consequence, to the whole society) by improving the teachers’ qualifications and the quality of teaching in schools. The results of the survey show that the reform soon started to produce disillusionment on both sides. The opinions expressed by teachers were far from enthusiastic and – though balanced – often very critical. Considering the cost of implementing the new system and the high financial outlays which are a result of carrying out the procedures, the question has to be asked whether such a gigantic social undertaking was worthwhile if it has produced such poor results.