A dialectic pragmatist stance provides ways of meaningful engagement with differences encountered in the context of study, in terms of cultural, ethnic, linguistic and other forms of diversity. The issues and challenges in the delivery of a multi-faceted and multi-dimensional curriculum as well possible solutions and enablers were also reviewed. The consolidated findings from the study reveal that teachers often use a hybrid pedagogical approach, blending both local and international practices and values in the delivery of the enacted curriculum. The potential and possibilities of culturally responsive, place-conscious pedagogical practices, rethinking the roles of teacher and learner, as well as the need for collaborative partnerships and relationships within communities of practice so as to enable the delivery of a future-oriented curriculum that address issues of equity, sustainability and social justice is reviewed and affirmed. The pragmatist research paradigm engages everyday realities and allow practical methods to elucidate issues from multiple viewpoints and contexts. A dialectical stance comprising of a constructive- interpretivist worldview facilitated the analysis of findings across the data sets.

The paper is based on critical theory and ethnographic approaches that examine the influences on teaching practice and the development of professional identities. Constructed from the model from Goodwin’s domains of influences from teachers’ beliefs, knowledge and practices on pedagogical practice, the revised model is elaborated to integrate an interactive relationship between these domains and that of practice and professional identities. A postmodernist lens is used so that professional identities and leadership roles may be seen to be multiple, changing, conflicting and tenuous and involving the process of reflexivity, agency and performativity.

The data presented in the discussion and findings of the paper have been analyzed and interpreted in the context of the study derived from doctoral research.

The data presented in this paper is qualitative in nature and was obtained through ethnographic observation and participant interviews and arises from the first author’s doctoral research. Tables 1-3 - First author