Who are the excellent teachers, and what do they look like? Well, this talk is only going to address part of that question. Specifically, this empirical report is based on self reported data, from teachers who have been identified as "Excellent Teachers". While all such teachers might not be excellent in terms of prizes for teaching and learning, they were selected by relatively knowledgeable, independent and experienced arbiters. Hence, it is hoped that this group may be informative of teachers who are very good practitioners of teaching and learning, within the secondary school structure, to inform a discussion of the nature and development of excellence in teaching.

It is clear that to research 'Excellent Teachers', we need to find some teachers who are excellent. The hard bit comes when one tries to define excellence! Is it about process or outcomes; objective measures or self-reporting; on whose standards and in what circumstances? (Wragg, Haynes, Wragg, Chamberlin 2000, pp.5-10). Does 'excellent' relate to being extraordinarily effective, whatever that means, within the every day, or successful in the extra-ordinary situations?

In an attempt around this gorgon's knot, and to avoid the technical complexities of measuring excellent teaching (White 1991), a different tack was taken. In May 1999, the principals of four Catholic systemic secondary schools were asked to nominate those of their teachers they thought to be 'Excellent Teachers' (Gudmundsdottir 1990). When asked 'What do you mean by "Excellent"?' the reply was that the principals themselves were the ones who knew. It was presumed they gathered all sorts of information from parents, other staff, students, their own observations, end of term reports, and a thousand daily encounters to judge which of their staff they could nominate as "Excellent". If asked to give some idea of number, principals were told that a large school might have as many as half a dozen excellent teachers.

These four secondary high school principals nominated nineteen teachers who were individually approached and invited to become a participant. Every one of these teachers accepted this invitation and became part of the cohort that remained intact over two school years.

The nineteen teachers who were selected and agreed to participate represent the diversity of among secondary teachers. There were nine women and ten men, teaching for as long as 39 years or as briefly as 5 years (Table 1). While this gender distribution is slightly biased towards males. there are more women than men teaching in these schools, the difference is not considered to be of concern.

Of these nineteen teachers, there were three teachers of mathematics, six of science, three of English, four of geography and humanities, one ESL and one history teacher (Table 2). Clearly, there are more science teachers than might be expected from a random sample. But this sample is a purposive sample (Cohen and Manion 1994, pp.89-90), selected to be maximally informative of a particular group, excellent teachers. The science teachers were nominated from three of the four schools, so there is no sense of 'favouritism' or bias in the principals' nominations of excellent teachers.

The ESL teacher (Table 2) worked within a language support unit for newly arrived students from non-English speaking backgrounds and, at the time of the data collection, was not involved in regular classes although had been teaching some regular classes in the school before the sample and was open to the possibility of doing so again.

Data collection started in Term 3, 1999 and concluded in Term 2 2000, with a face to face in-depth interview each school term. Each interview time was negotiated to be mutually convenient, conducted in a private room in the participant's school. Each semi-structured interview was conducted with questions unseen by the participant and the interview focused on a range of issues, in general similar to most participants but sensitive to the prior conversations of each and focusing on their story as a developing professional teacher (Rubin and Rubin 1995 pp122-138).

The interviews were taped, with explicit permission of the participants at each interview, transcribed and input to QSR NVivo, a qualitative software tool. Field memos were taken and kept in note form and a research diary was maintained over the period of the data collection and analysis - which is not yet complete.

In order to maintain confidentiality, the participants were asked to choose a name by which they would be known within the research. This name is used on all hardcopy of notes, identifiers of cassette tapes, transcripts and will be used consistently herein. Schools will not be identified. Principals were interviewed twice within this project and the second interview was recorded after the last teacher interviews. The principals' interviews are not reported in this paper.

The transcripts of the interviews, field notes and research diary are the data of this project. The interviews were taken to be the informed self rationalisation of these teachers, not necessarily the 'truth' but the honest reflections of their perceptions, thoughts and feelings at the time of the interview. No attempt was made to validate, in the sense of checking for accuracy, from one interview to another, although there was reference back to significant ideas and statements to further explore particular areas. Quotations that appear in this text are meant to be indicative of the perception or view point of the person at the time and in that sense are representative. Selection of these quotations has been sensitive to context and surrounding conversation (Rubin and Rubin 1995, pp.226-242).

Lastly, it is fair to say that the analysis of these 75 or more interviews is ongoing and developing. Respecting this ongoing analysis, the findings report the data of the first interview with each participant.

The first expression from this sample of teachers is a realistic humility. They report a clear sense of their own limitations.

While Alice might be read from an egalitarian stance, she is making a claim of competence in the mechanics of teaching: organisation; adequate knowledge of the content; and being responsive to student interactions, she is also suggesting that she does not see why those aspects necessarily are claims to excellence. Louis also plays down the term excellent, but adds what he considers an important part of being a teacher.

Allied to this modest sense of their own abilities, is a strong sense of the talents of others. It is clear that " if you're talking about excellent teachers, an excellent teacher also recognises other excellent teachers" (Brady).

These teachers see themselves as fully a part of the teaching profession, not apart nor above colleagues and peers.

Teaching has a strong dose of idealism, and these teachers aspire to outcomes well beyond the narrow interpretations of subjects.

Boetius has a strong sense of being a learner, and this is part of what excellence means: not only to be a learner himself but to remember his own trials as a learner and at the same time to learn from his younger colleagues.

These teachers clearly aspire to a holistic measure of their own success. As Boetius continues to unwrap a sense of success as a teacher:

Each teacher was asked in what manner they were excellent. They were asked this question in a number of different ways in different interviews, questions about what they did best, what they considered the essence of good teaching, what they wanted most to do as a teacher, what their excellent teaching might look like, and what were the criteria of excellent teaching.

Of these teachers, most entered teaching directly from undergraduate studies. The majority of teachers expressed a strong desire to 'do good' initially attracted them to teaching.

Some had initially explored other professions, some have had time out for parenting or exploring other jobs or even because of the demands of teaching. Not all started with a sense that teaching was to be their vocation. Some of these teachers started because it was convenient or from a lack of other options. Not all these teachers see themselves as 'academic' or even intellectually strong. The majority emphasise their experiences as learners rather than the extent of their knowledge.

A strong sense of concern for the student who battles or finds the subject difficult rather than the student who finds the work easy or scores the highest grades.

Clearly, many teachers speak of building upon their previous experiences and an accumulation of skills, resources and knowledge. This taps into their common expression of being organised, being competent within one's subject, having a clear sense of what needs to be done and how to do it.

Sarah introduces an active sense into this expression of experience. She talks about "materials I've made myself" which makes clear that it is not just accumulation of resources but knowing their value and adapting them to the needs of students, "constantly updating materials, modifying materials". There is no sense of routine or trotting out the same stuff, but using what one has to address the problems of the new day.

Not one of these teachers voiced an opinion that their present levels of skill in the classroom were other than hard won. Ruby expresses the view that only recently has she felt on top of her profession and she has been teaching for 9 years. The gradual development of the necessary skills of managing classrooms was reported by most. Each of these teachers acknowledged that the mechanics of the classroom were important.

It is to this 'far deeper issue' that I want to turn.

There was one expression in which these teachers were unanimous. Of the 19 participants, 17 explicitly made this assertion their first criterion, while two offered it either second or third to the question: 'What makes an excellent teacher?' "I love my job as a teacher" (Kathleen). While this might be a usual comment, it reveals a deeper engagement that characterises all these teachers.

This affection does not blind them to the tough parts of the job, and even the unrewarding aspects of teaching.

From one of the younger teachers in the group there is even a sense of wonder:

This sense is picked up by more experienced teachers who speak about the privilege of teaching

Linc says that the privilege evokes a response that calls for his best. The tone of Linc's comments are about what he is given and the ways in which he profits from the privilege of being entrusted with caring for students.

Not surprisingly, there are two concerns that irritate teachers. These two issues are salary and the day to day stress of dealing with students, 'administrivia' and staying positive and balanced.

Alice introduces that positive tone of keeping on and being committedly positive to the students, no matter what. Scott states it strongly, if he thought that he was not a positive influence he would move. This is an internal judgement, Scott notes that there are few rewards, and requires an ability to balance the other, job-related, issues for the good of the students (Ruby).

It is reasonable to ask: "Why do these people stay?" Part of it is explained by the teachers as being part of their personality (cf Alice, above), but there are stronger elements. Ron summarises the belief for these teachers.

For Ron, the issue is bigger than personality - it taps into who he is and his commitments. Teaching is not only energising but life-giving: wellbeing, nourishing him emotionally, intellectually and spiritually. Ron identifies one of the joys of teaching: that teaching is life giving for both the teacher and the students, and can be so only because it is so mutual. Ron is not alone in this exact summation, several teachers used the same expression.

There are a number of threads that can be explored within these interviews with teachers identified by their principals as excellent. It might be helpful to first identify that which was not said.

These teachers did not refer to a number of aspects that the naive observer might see as important for good teaching. Firstly, expert subject knowledge, or even good subject knowledge was not mentioned. Might it be that their experience as learners (cf Boetius and Ruby) suggest that knowledge can be acquired as needed? A strong sense of classroom discipline was another omission - might the focus on the student in a holistic sense (David), a forgiving attitude (Louis and Alice) replace concerns about classroom control? Teachers did not talk about their IT skills or how skilled they were in terms of curriculum planning and implementation. They did not speak about innovations of classroom practice or extra curricula involvements. It is not suggested that these teachers are not skilled in curriculum nor that they that they are inactive in extra curricula activities [because many are so committed], but they did not perceive these skills being central to the issues of excellence.

From discussions with these teachers, what can be said about how they sketched excellence in teaching? Within this discussion, it should be emphasised that excellence is constructed by these teachers as developmental (Ruby). In essence, these teachers listed four main characteristics of the excellent teacher.

The first characteristic is being organised and having the details of the classroom under control (Alice and Ruby). There is a clear sense of getting done what needs to be done and meeting deadlines (Chris). This is likely to accord with these teachers' selection by the principals - they do get the administrative tasks done on time. So there may be a sense of mutual reinforcement with the means of their selection for the sample of this study.

The second characteristic common to the teachers was a commitment to the whole person. This commitment recognises the need for their own personal growth and awareness of their own journey (Louis and Chris). David makes it clear that it is the student one is teaching, not a particular subject, and there must to be a holistic understanding of the needs of the students. Humour is a vital part (Louis) as well as an ability to overlook the smaller issues in favour of the more important - the students (Ruby). If anything, this focus on the student favours the less able rather than the gifted (Scott), the needy and naughty rather than the best behaved (Sarah), as part of the teacher's personal preference (Alice).

The third attribute identified by these teachers is the most central: an excellent teacher loves his or her students (Sarah, Ron, Alice, Shirley and Elisha). This is their clearest statement: excellent teachers love their students. In some of these conversations the interviewer challenged "Do you mean that you want to like them (the students)?" in each case the emphatic response was 'NO!, you must love them'. These teachers see that this affective bond, which for some mirrors that of parent to child (Ron), and is basic to their understanding of how they relate to their students. Not only was this expression unanimous among the teachers interviewed, it was also the strongest expression. This force indicates that the teachers' own understanding of themselves in relation to their students requires that they act for their benefit, beyond the notion of 'service' to that of 'care' (Ron). One might suspect that the over-use of the term 'service industry' has eroded the meaning of service. Maybe 'care' encapsulates this affective commitment of excellent teachers to their students.

The last characteristic of these teachers was a personal commitment to their students. They expressed a sense of wonder (Elisha and Felicity) and gratitude (Shirley and Linc). What is worthy of note is the consequence of this commitment: - energy. Ron and Lyn speak about teaching being life giving, of coming alive in the classroom, of teaching being so energising (Sarah). This life-giving sense comes at the same time as recognising the difficulties of teaching: low pay and constant work with demanding adolescents mentioned by Sarah, Emma, Alice and Louis (Robertson, 1996). It is useful to remember that the bulk of these interviews were conducted towards the end of school term 3 when teachers are tired and looking forward to a rest. Yet they speak of their commitment energising them (Wideen, Mayer-Smith and Moon, 1996). Might it be that this sense of the classroom energising, in a deep and personal sense rather than a surface mood, be one hallmark of the excellent teacher? Excellent teachers are motivated and energised by their students, they love them as individuals and this affective commitment moves them to act for their benefit.

All these teachers were employed in Catholic secondary schools. It could be wondered whether these teachers were influenced by this milieu or representing a 'party line'. It is not evident to the author that a party line was the case. Nearly half of these teachers had taught in non Catholic schools and made the comment, prior to the audio taped interview, that many excellent teachers taught in other schools. No sense of 'them' and 'us' was heard, nor was there expressed a sense that values and excellence were more readily identified in one sector than another. Hence, it is considered reasonable to hear these comments as reasoned expressions of the teachers' honest opinions.

These reflections of excellent teaching are not new. "Good teaching comes from the heart" claims Kraft (2000), and Hansen (1995, pp.137-161) argues for a renewed sense of vocation for all teachers as a fundamental shift towards excellence.

These four attributes can be aptly summarised as a strikingly positive perspective of secondary education. This positive view is not based on salaries, conditions or advancement. It is grounded in a sense of commitment to young people, holding in balance a realistic appreciation of personal abilities, and a determination that through personal effort these teachers can make a contribution.

It may be useful to ask what this study can tell us about how to encourage the development of excellent teachers. Firstly, there is no suggestion that the daily skills of teaching, classroom management and subject knowledge are not important. This paper suggests that these matters are foundational, but that more than technical competence is required for excellence.

The four characteristics that these teachers identified relate to personal attributes of each teacher (Banner and Cannon 1997, p.2). Professional development for curriculum, IT and other matters are important. Might it also be important to foster the spirit of teachers, give them a chance to develop affective skills with their students, point beyond the immediate concerns of the classroom to the holistic aims that teachers, schools and parents have for students. The messages sent by school management to younger staff might be clarified to better distinguish what is most valued by principals. It might be that 'PD' might also come to mean personal development as well as professional development. This echoes what many educational leaders already sense: that "good teaching cannot be reduced to technique; good teaching comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher" (Palmer 1998, p.10).

There is another task indicated here: how to develop a culture that not only values these human skills of the expert teacher but fosters them, supports them and stimulates their growth. While issues that continue to irritate teachers like perceptions of low pay and status are beyond the influence of individual school principals, these excellent teachers have identified concerns that can be addressed within a school culture that aspires to care for individuals.

This data is still undergoing scrutiny, and there are further series of interviews with these teachers that are yet to be analysed. It is hoped that this project may be a small step towards understanding excellence in classroom teaching. It needs to be enriched by observational studies, comparisons of data across subjects, year levels, teaching styles and systems. It must be evaluated in the light of student outcomes, professional criteria and our deepening understanding of teaching and learning processes. It does, however, allow some teachers to speak clearly that good teaching is a matter of the heart, and that good teaching calls forth the very best of those who strive to call themselves 'teachers'.

This paper has explored the constructions of 19 teachers recommended by their principals as demonstrating excellence in teaching. Using qualitative interviews the understanding of what is required for excellence in the classroom was explored.

The data can be seen to illustrate four main themes. These attributes of excellent teachers are: having sufficient skills of organisation and a work ethic to meet reasonable deadlines and expectations; a solid commitment to the whole person so that the needs of the students are directly addressed, especially those less academically gifted; that the teacher loves each student with an affection that is real and non possessive; and lastly that teachers make a personal commitment to the benefit of their students. This last, and possibly most demanding attribute is also the most significant, because in the midst of many competing demands it calls forth life and energy that moves teaching into the realm where role and person unite to complement the integrity of the teacher.